- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010554592025 NC: 2026:KHC:47820 RPFC No. 241 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 241 OF 2025 BETWEEN: DR. KIRAN T. V., S/O.LATE DR.T.VENUGOPAL, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O.NO.7144, 14TH FLOOR, EBONY BLOCK, SOBHA FOREST VIEW APARTMENT, NEAR KANAKAPURA ROAD, BANASHANKARI 6TH STAGE, LINGADHEERAHANALLI, BENGALURU-560062. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAKASH R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT SHARADA W/O.DR.KIRAN T.V., D/O. SEENAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, CARRYING ON BUSINESS AT "LITTLE MILLENNIUM" PRE SCHOOL AT VINAYAKA NAGARA, KADABAGERE, NEXT TO SRI. BALAJI NARASIMHA SUDARSHANA TEMPLE, BENGLAURU-562130. 2. BABY LOHA GOWDA, D/O.DR.KIRAN T.V. MINOR, Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010554592025 NC: 2026:KHC:47820 RPFC No. 241 of 2025 3. BABY LITHI GOWDA D/O KIRAN T V MINOR RESPONDENT NO. 2 AND 3 ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1 SMT. SHARADA. ALL ARE R/O.LAKSHMIPURA, DASANAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU-562123. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SURESH KUMAR H. M.,ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 AND R3 ARE MINORS REP. BY R1) THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.12.2022 PASSED IN C.MISC NO.211/2021 ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BENGALURU., ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125(1)(a) OF Cr.P.C., FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL ORDER No representation on petitioner's side on call. Sri.Suresh Kumar H.M, learned counsel for respondents is present. There was no representation on petitioner's side even on 19.08.2026. Petitioner filed this revision petition with delay - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010554592025 NC: 2026:KHC:47820 RPFC No. 241 of 2025 of 885 days. IA No.1/2025 filed for condoning the delay is also pending. Having filed the revision petition with such delay, petitioner ought to have been vigilant in pursuing the case. However, he is not evincing interest. Therefore, this Court is of the view that there are no grounds to adjourn the case. Hence, IA No.1/2025 as well as revision petition are dismissed for non prosecution. Consequently, the proceedings in IA No.2/2025 are closed. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE AP CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16