- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010390292021 NC: 2026:KHC:42943 RPFC No. 190 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 190 OF 2021 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. USHA M. @ KAVYA W/O NAGARAJ R, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS COOLIE, 2. ROTHITH N., S/O NAGARAJ R, AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS, SINCE MINOR, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER SMT.USHA M @ KAVYA, W/O NAGRAJ.R. LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE 2ND PETITIONER BOTH ARE R/O HARIHARESHWARA TEMPLE STREET, KOTE LAYOUT, CHIKMAGALURU TOWN - 577101. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ADISH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SACHIN B S.,ADVOCATE) AND: NAGARAJ R., S/O LATE M.RAMEGOWDA, Digitally signed by SOWMYA DODDAMARAIAH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010390292021 NC: 2026:KHC:42943 RPFC No. 190 of 2021 AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, BANK EMPLOYEE, R/O YADDEHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, K.R.PETE TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT 571426. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ROOPESHA B., ADVOCATE) THIS RPFC FILED U/S.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT 1984 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.02.2020 PASSED IN Crl.MISC.NO.91/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE C/c. PRL.JUDGE, FAMILY CURT, CHIKKAMAGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED U/S.125 OF Cr.P.C FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL ORDER Sri.Roopesha.B learned counsel for the respondent states that petitioners sought for modification of the impugned order and filed an application to that effect before the trial Court and thus, this revision petition has become infructuous. Same submission was made by learned counsel for the respondent even on 04.08.2026. 2. Sri.Adish representing Sri.Sachin.B.S learned counsel on record for the petitioners states that petitioners - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010390292021 NC: 2026:KHC:42943 RPFC No. 190 of 2021 are not evincing interest in the revision petition and therefore, necessary orders may be passed. 3. Having considered the submission made by both learned counsel, taking into account the fact that the petitioners are not evincing interest in the proceedings, this Court is of the view that the revision petition is required to be dismissed. Resultantly, the revision petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE DS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31