S M Sharmila Rani vs K Ashok Kumar
2021 Latest Caselaw 6956 Kant

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

                        BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD

             REVIEW PETITION NO.71/2021

BETWEEN:

S.M. SHARMILA RANI,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
WO K. ASHOK KUMAR,
D/O S.D. MUNIDEVEGOWDA,
NEAR SACRED HEART SCHOOL,
GEDDLAHALLI ROAD, UPPARAHALLI ,
TUMAKURU - 572 102.                      ...PETITIONER

   (BY SMT. S.M. SHARMILA RANI - PARTY IN PERSON)

AND:

K. ASHOK KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
S/O KRISHNEGOWDA,
ASST. MANAGER, TCS CO.,
PHASE-3, SPENCER PLAZA MANGAL
TIRTH ESTATE, 769 ANNA SALAI,
TRIPLICANE, CHENNAI - 600 002.
AND RESIDENT OF Y.N. KOPPAL ROAD,
KYATHANAHALLI, PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 427.        ...RESPONDENT

           (BY SRI H.C. SHIVARAMU, ADVOCATE )


     THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
114 AND ARTICLE 137 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA,
                             2



PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO REVIEW THE
JUDGMENT DATED 10.11.2020 PASSED IN RPFC
NO.179/2018 C/W RPPC NO.99/2019 IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

     THIS  REVIEW  PETITION   COMING  ON  FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE
THE FOLLOWING:


                         ORDER

The party-in-person and the learned counsel for

the respondent are heard for final disposal.

2. The petitioner has sought for the review of

this Court's order dated 10.11.2020 in RPFC

No.99/2019 c/w RPFC No.179/2018 essentially on two

grounds. Firstly, she asserts that though she is entitled

to receive a sum of Rs.4,64,264/- including the amount

in deposit, she has not been paid the entire amount;

secondly, even if the amount of Rs.4,64,264/- is paid to

her that would not be sufficient for her maintenance.

3. This Court had called upon the concerned

family Court to file a report on the disbursement of the

amount. The family Court has filed its report dated

20.12.2021 stating the total sum of Rs.4,18,363/-in

deposit has been disbursed to the petitioner in

Crl.Misc.No.209/2018 and another sum of

Rs.1,50,000/- is paid in Crl.Misc.No.21/2016. The

petitioner admits the payment of Rs.4,18,363/- stating

that the last of the amounts have been transferred to

her account in the last 3-4 days. The learned counsel

for the respondent submits that insofar as differential

amount between Rs.4,64,264/- and Rs.4,18,363/-, the

same is paid as recorded in the order sheet. Therefore,

this Court is of the considered view that there is no

reason for interference on this ground.

4. Insofar as the petitioner's other ground that

the sum granted by this Court would not be sufficient

for her maintenance, this ground would touch upon the

merits of the order and that would be outside the scope

of the review. Hence, this Court cannot interfere with

the impugned order on such ground. However, the

disposal of this petition cannot affect the petitioner's

rights otherwise in law.

The petition therefore, stands disposed of

accordingly.

In view of the disposal of the petition, the I.As. do

not survive for consideration.

Sd/-

JUDGE

MD