Sri. Karnanda P Subbaiah vs Smt. Muthamma @ Shilpa
2021 Latest Caselaw 4022 Kant

                           1

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

   DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021

                       BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

        WRIT PETITION NO.810 OF 2020(GM-FC)
BETWEEN:

SRI. KARNANDA P SUBBAIAH,
S/O KK POONACHA,
AGED 37 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.147, PID NO.1-14-147,
WARD NO.1 BLOCK -14,
SUBRAMANAYANAGAR,
MADIKERI.
                                       ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. N RAVINDRANATH KAMATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SMT. MUTHAMMA @ SHILPA,
   W/O KARNANDA P SUBBAIAH,
   AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,

2. MASTER BENAKA BOJANNA K S,
   S/O KARNANDA P SUBBAIAH,
   AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS,
   SINCE THE PETITIONER NO.2 IS
   A MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER
   GUARDIAN MOTHER PETITIONER NO.1,
   BOTH ARE RESIDING AT
   MANGHALLI VILLAGE,
   VIRAJPET TALUK - 571 218.
                                       ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SANKET M YENGAI, ADVOCATE;
    R2- MINOR REPRESENTED BY R1)

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH JUDGEMENT AND DECREE IN M.C.NO.81/2016 ON
THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MADIKERE DATED
24.03.2017 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE- A.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
                              2



                          ORDER

The challenge is to the judgment & decree dated

24.03.2017 made by the learned Sr. Civil judge, Madikeri,

at Annexure-A in MC No.81/2016 filed by the respondents

herein.

2. After service of notice, the respondents having

entered appearance through their counsel resist the writ

petition making submission in justification of the

impugned Judgment & Decree and the reasons on which

they are structured.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the

parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court

declines to grant indulgence in the matter inasmuch as, no

ground is taken as to the absence of duty to maintain;

challenge is on the or quantum of amount/maintenance;

petition is structured on the grievance as against the

quantum of maintenance only. This aspect can be gone

into by the Court which granted the impugned judgment &

decree if an application is field under Section 24 of the

Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956.

4. The vehement contention of learned counsel for

the petitioner that the appeal filed by him in MFA

No.10134/2018 (MC) has been disposed off by the

Coordinate Bench of this Court as having been withdrawn

vide order dated 13.01.2020, does not much come to his

aid since it was his case that appeal was not maintainable;

no adjudication on this point has been done; therefore, he

is not justified in seeking shelter under the said order of

learned Coordinate Judges.

In the above circumstances, this writ petition being

devoid of merits is liable to be dismissed and accordingly,

it is, costs having been made easy.

To enable the petitioner to move the Court below, the

executing Court is requested to keep the subject Execution

Proceedings in a suspended animation for a period of four

weeks. All contentions barring the ones treated

hereinabove are kept open.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Bsv