Sri Sunny Lloyd Alexander vs Smt. Sujatha Thapa @ Suezan Thapa
2022 Latest Caselaw 204 Kant

                           1

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                       BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

        WRIT PETITION NO.6978 OF 2020(GM-FC)

BETWEEN:

SRI. SUNNY LLOYD ALEXANDER,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
S/O C X ALEXANDER,
R/AT NO.2-15-1322/A,
UDYOG POWER PRESS COMPOUND,
BEJAI, MANGALORE - 575 004.
                                         ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. A KESHAVA BHAT, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. SUJATHA THAPA @ SUEZAN THAPA,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
W/O SUNNY LLOYD ALEXANDER,
D/O RABHI KUMAR THAPA,
R/AT BRANDAVANA GARDEN,
GEORGE MARTIS ROAD, KADRI,
MANGALORE - 575 004.
                                       ... RESPONDENT

       THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE OR MODIFY THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.09.2015
PASSED BY THE FAMILY COURT AT D.K. MANGALORE IN
M.C.NO.113/2015 IN ANNEXURE-A IN SO FAR AS PAYMENT
OF PERMANENT ALIMONY TO THE RESPONDENT.

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

                           ORDER

The grievance of the petitioner is against the

compromise decree dated 11.09.2015 whereby MC

No.113/2015 has been disposed off by the court below; the

Registry has raised the objection as to the maintainability

of writ petition for laying a challenge to the decree of the

kind. In a catena of decisions such objections have been

sustained by this Court.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri

Keshava Bahat vehemently contends that liberty should

be reserved to the petitioner to lay a challenge to the

compromise decree by making an appropriate application

under order XXIII Rule 3-A r/w Section 151 of CPC in the

light of decision of this Court in B.P.NAGARAJ & ANR. Vs.

B.P.NANJAPPA & OTHERS, 2021 (3) KLJ 465; this is fair

enough and there is no reason as to why such liberty

should not be reserved to the litigant.

In the above circumstances and with the above

observations & liberty this writ petition is disposed off

with. All contentions are kept open.

It hardly needs to be stated that if such an

application is filed, the same shall be considered by the

competent court in a post haste manner.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Bsv