Karnataka High Court
Sri Mallikarjuna M M vs Smt Nagashree on 22 January, 2021
Author: B.V.Nagarathna And Uma
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22nd DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G. UMA
M.F.A.No.1423/2018 (MC)
BETWEEN:
SRI MALLIKARJUNA M.M.
S/O. M.R. MURUGESHAPPA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/O. MASAROOR VILLAGE,
HOSANAGARA TALUK - 577 418,
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI PRUTHVI WODEYAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT. NAGASHREE,
D/O. HALAPPA GOWDA,
AGE MAJOR,
R/O. GUBBIGA VILLAGE,
HOSANAGARA TALUK-577 418,
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.
.... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI MAHESH R. UPPIN, ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 28(1) OF THE
HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
DECREE DATED 16.01.2018 PASSED IN M.C.NO.69/2013 ON
THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
SAGAR, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION
12(1) (1) (C) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
NAGARATHNA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
-2-
JUDGMENT
Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the
consent of learned counsel on both sides, it is heard
finally.
2. Appellant is the husband, while the respondent
is wife. The appellant/husband has assailed the judgment
and decree passed in M.C.No.69/2013, dated 16/01/2018,
by the Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC., Sagar, by
which, the petition filed under Section 12(1)(c) of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the
Act" for the sake of brevity) has been dismissed.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the
respective parties in the presence of the parties.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted
that the appellant is aggrieved by the misrepresentation of
the respondent/wife vis-a-vis the date of her birth and
therefore, the petition was filed under Section 12(1)(c) of
the Act seeking annulment of marriage dated 03/05/2013,
which was solemnized at Bapat Sabha Bhavan, Sagar, as
per customs. He submitted that the parties have not
resided together since the year 2013. Therefore, relief
may be granted to the appellant in this appeal.
5. By way of response, learned counsel for the
respondent/wife brought to our notice the judgment and
decree passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC,
Sagar, dated 21/02/2019 in M.C.No.30/2015, which was a
petition filed under Section 9 of the Act by the
respondent/wife, seeking restitution of conjugal rights,
which was allowed. He submitted that there has been no
compliance of the direction issued to the
appellant/husband to join the respondent/wife to lead a
marital life. He also submitted that the appellant has not
assailed the said judgment and decree.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted
that liberty may be reserved to the appellant to seek
dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under
Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Act in view of the fact that the
judgment and decree passed in M.C.No.30/2015 would be
the basis for seeking such a relief as there has been no
restitution of conjugal rights since the date of the said
judgment on 21/02/2019.
7. Parties are also present before the Court.
8. In the circumstances, we dispose of this
appeal by reserving liberty to the appellant/husband to file
a petition under Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Act to seek
dissolution of his marriage with the respondent/wife, which
was solemnized on 03/05/2013.
9. In view of the liberty reserved to the appellant
herein, we do not think it necessary to go into the merits
of the matter in this appeal.
10. Liberty is also reserved to the respondent/wife
herein to seek maintenance in accordance with law either
in the petition to be filed by the appellant/husband under
Section 13(1A)(ii) of the Act or independently.
11. Ordered accordingly.
In view of the disposal of the appeal in the aforesaid
terms, I.A.No.1/2020 stands disposed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
S*
