Pradeep V Rao vs Poornima
2021 Latest Caselaw 275 Kant

                           1



  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

                        PRESENT

       THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

                         AND

           THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G.UMA


MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 10539 OF 2018 (MC)

BETWEEN:

PRADEEP V RAO
SON OF VISHVESHWARA RAO
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDING AT 1418, 11TH CROSS
21ST MAIN, SECTOR 1
HSR LAYOUT
BENGALURU-560 102.
                                      ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI:S.SABARISH GANDHI, ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

AND:

POORNIMA
WIFE OF PRADEEP V RAO
CARE OF SANJEEVA RAO
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
RESIDING AT OM NILAYA, AMBADEKALLU
NITTE POST, KARKALA TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT-574 110.
                                      ...RESPONDENT

      THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTIONS 19(1) AND 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT,
1984, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
                               2



DATED 06.09.2018 IN M.C.NO.14 OF 2016 PASSED BY THE
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ACJM, KARKALA, AS ILLEGAL AND
UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER RELIEF'S
AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THIS DAY,    NAGARATHNA, J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

                      JUDGMENT

This appeal was filed on 21.12.2018. Office

objections have not been removed for the fourth time.

Though the matter is called out twice, there is no

representation on behalf of the appellant.

2. The appeal is filed by the husband assailing the

judgment and decree passed in MC No.14 of 2016 by the

Court of Senior Civil Judge and ACJM, Karkala. Respondent

had filed the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage

Act, 1955. By the said impugned judgment and decree,

the petition has been allowed. Hence, this appeal.

3. Since there is no removal of office objections

and no representation on behalf of the appellant, the

appeal is dismissed for non removal of office objections

and non prosecution.

4. However, disposal of this appeal will not come

in the way of the appellant seeking relief under Section

13(1-A)(ii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, if so advised.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

*bgn/-