Sri. C. Jagadish vs Smt. T.R. Nagaveni
2021 Latest Caselaw 6122 Kant

                            1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

   DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                        BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ

               R.P.F.C. NO.209 OF 2019

BETWEEN:

SRI. C.JAGADISH,
S/O CHIKKASIDDA MALLAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS.
R/O MALLASANDRA PALYA, KASABA HOBLI,
TUMAKURU TALUK AND DIST.-572 101.
                                            ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. V.B.SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. T.R.NAGAVENI,
W/O C. JAGADISH,
D/O T.H. RAMANJINEYA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/O 2ND MAIN ROAD,
GURU LAYOUT, KUVEMPUNAGAR,
TUMAKURU TOWN-572 103.
                                            ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PATEL D. KAREGOWDA, ADVOCATE)

      THIS R.P.F.C. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF FAMILY
COURTS ACT, AGAINST JUDGMENT DATED 25.10.20119
PASSED IN C.MIS.NO.154/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL
JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, TUMAKURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 125 OF CR.P.C, FOR
MAINTENANCE.

     THIS R.P.F.C. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                 2


                            ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner has fled a memo

dated 14.12.2021 to withdraw this petition with liberty to

re-open and initiate appropriate legal proceedings, if the

affidavit filed by the respondent herein on 26.11.2021 is

false.

2. A perusal of the record of the Trial Court would

disclose that the respondent herein had deposed that she

was employed as a teacher in a private institution.

However, in an affidavit filed before this Court pursuant to

the order dated 07.10.2021, the respondent disclosed that

she is not employed. Further, an affidavit was filed by the

respondent on 26.11.2021 stating therein that she was

never employed as a teacher in a private institution and

the evidence recorded in C.Mis.No.154/2018 was an

inadvertent mistake.

3. In view of the affidavit filed by the respondent

and in view of the memo filed by the petitioner seeking

withdrawal of the revision petition, it is appropriate that

the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the petition

reserving liberty to the petitioner to revive this petition in

the event statement made by the respondent in the

affidavit dated 26.11.2021 is false.

Hence, this revision petition is disposed off with

liberty as stated above.

The arrears of maintenance deposited before this

Court shall be released to the respondent.

Sd/-

JUDGE

NBM