Sripad S/O. Ramachandrasa Pujari vs Smt. Swati W/O. Sripad Pujari
2022 Latest Caselaw 7945 Kant

             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

                RPFC NO.100015 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

SRIPAD
S/O RAMACHANDRA PUJARI
AGE 33 YEARS
OCC: BANK EMPLOYEE
WORKING AT SARASWAT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.
MALLIKARJUN MOTOR AND SCOOTER MART
269/1, JAYADEVA CIRCLE ROAD
R/O LIG NO.48, KHB COLONY
SUBHASNAGAR, KESHWAPUR
HUBLI
                                         ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI KUSHAL BOLMAL AND
 SMT. BHAGYASHREE N BIKKANNAVAR, ADVOCATES)

AND:

SMT. SWATI
W/O SRIPAD PUJARI
AGE 30 YEARS
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O C/O MOTHILALSA K RAIBAGI
H NO.29, GANESH PARK,
HOSUR, HUBBALLI
                                            ...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. ANUSHA V. SANGAMI, ADVOCATE)
                                 2




     THIS REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4)
OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
ORDER DATED 30.12.2017 IN CRL.MISC.284 OF 2015 ON THE
FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, HUBBALLI,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 125
OF CR.P.C.

    THIS/ESE REVISION PETITION/S COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                            ORDER

This petition was called in the morning session and there

was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, however, Smt.

Anusha V. Sangami, learned counsel for the respondent,

present. The matter was passed over. When the matter was

called again in the post-lunch session, again there was no

representation on behalf of the petitioner and the learned

counsel for the respondent was present.

2. Smt. Anusha, learned counsel appearing for the

respondent, submitted that pursuant to the order dated 02nd

September, 2020 passed by this Court, the petitioner has not

deposited 50% of maintenance as directed by the Family Court.

In that view of the matter, I am of the view that the petitioner is

not interested to pursue the matter. Revision Petition stands

dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

lnn