Sri.Tumu Ravikumar vs Smt.Sai Srivandana
2022 Latest Caselaw 7941 Kant

                            -1-




                                   RPFC No. 100040 of 2016




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

         DATED THIS THE 01st DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                          BEFORE
         THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
       REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100040 OF 2016

BETWEEN:


     SRI. TUMU RAVIKUMAR S/O TUMU DORA BABU,
     AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE,
     R/O. H.NO.204, 3RD FLOOR,
     "C" BLOCK, ISR SUKRITHI APARTMENT,
     VARTHUR VILLAGE,
     VARTHUR HOBLI,
     BENGALURU.



                                                  ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR BURJI, ADVOCATE - ABSENT)
AND:
1.   SMT. SAI SRIVANDANA,
     W/O TUMU RAVIKUMAR,
     D/O. REDDY MASI BHEEMALINGAPPA,
     AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,

2.   VAISHNAVI D/O TUMU RAVIKUMAR
     SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY
     HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN,
     SMT.SAI SRIVANDANA,


     BOTH ARE RESIDNG AT 2ND WARD,
     KAMMA STREET, KUDITHINI VILLAGE,
     BALLARI TQ AND DIST.



                                             ...RESPONDENTS
                              -2-




                                    RPFC No. 100040 of 2016


(SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK FOR C/R1;
R2 MINOR REPRESENTED BY R1)

     THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT
ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DTD:16.01.2016, IN
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS NO.164/2015, ON THE FILE OF THE
PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BALLARI, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE PETITION FILED U/S. 125 OF CR.P.C.
     THIS RPFC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT
MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                            ORDER

When this revision petition was taken up in the morning, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and thereafter the matter was passed over. Even in the second session, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.

Since the revision petition is of the year 2016, it appears that the petitioner is not willing to argue the matter. Accordingly, the revision petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SVH