Karnataka High Court
Reena Ahluwalia vs P S Ahluwalia on 22 March, 2022
Bench: Alok Aradhe, S Vishwajith Shetty
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1628 OF 2011 (FC)
BETWEEN:
REENA AHLUWALIA
W/O P S AHLUWALIA
AGED...., R/O 2989/1,
HAL II STAGE
INDIRANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 008. ... APPELLANT
(BY SMT PRAMILA M NESARGI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI MUNISWAMY GOWDA)
AND:
P S AHLUWALIA
S/O LATE G S AHLUWALIA
AGED 58 YEARS, R/O 2989/1,
HAL II STAGE,
INDIRANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 008. ..RESPONDENT
(BY SMT RAJESHWARI, ADV. FOR SRI R B SADASHIVAPPA)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19 OF FAMILY
COURTS ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
05.01.2011 PASSED IN M.C.NO.1163/1999 ON THE FILE OF
THE II ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT,
BANGALORE, ALLOWING THE PETITION UNDER SECTION
2
13(1)(I)(Ia) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, FOR DIVORCE ON
THE GROUND OF ADULTERY AND CRUELTY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS
DAY, ALOK ARADHE J. DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT
Smt Pramila, Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant.
Smt Rajeshwari, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This appeal arises from Judgment dated
05.01.2011 passed by the II Additional Principal Judge,
family Court at Bengaluru in M.C. No.1163/1999 by which
the petition filed by the respondent/husband seeking divorce
on the ground of cruelty has been allowed by the Family
Court.
3. Facts giving rise to the filing of this appeal briefly
stated are that marriage between the parties was performed
on 21.10.1977 in Mumbai. The respondent/husband filed a
petition seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of
cruelty and adultery. Appellant/wife contested the aforesaid
proceeding. The Family Court however, vide judgment dated
05.01.2011 has dissolved the marriage performed between
the parties on the ground of cruelty. Against the aforesaid
order, the wife is in appeal before us.
4. This Court had heard learned counsel for the
parties in the presence of the parties on 20.01.2021.
Thereafter the following consensus was arrived at between
the parties which was recorded in the order sheet which
reads as under:
"We have heard learned senior counsel
for the appellant and learned counsel for
respondent in presence of the parties.
In the first instance, the discussions were
with regard to appellant - wife having a
separate kitchen/kitchenette in the first floor of
the premises where she is presently residing,
so that there is mitigation of conflict between
the parties. In that regard, appellant to
ascertain from the Engineer or concerned with
regard to the feasibility of constructing a
kitchen in the first floor of the premises.
The respondent - husband in principle
has agreed to the said proposal".
5. When the matter was taken up today, learned
senior counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant
is aged about 65 years whereas the respondent is aged
about 74 years. Learned counsel for respondent also
submitted that at this stage of life they do not want
dissolution of marriage.
6. However, in view of the consensus arrived at
between the parties, the following directions are issued:
(i) The appellant shall be permitted to occupy the first
floor of the premises belonging to the respondent where she
is presently residing.
(ii) The respondent shall provide a kitchen in the first floor
so that the respondent/wife can utilise the kitchen
separately. The aforesaid facility shall be provided by the
respondent within a period of three months from today. In
case the respondent does not provide the facility of separate
kitchen to the appellant at the first floor, it would be open for
the appellant to approach this Court seeking appropriate
directions.
(iii) The parties shall reside separately. The appellant
shall reside in the first floor whereas the respondent/husband
shall occupy the ground floor.
7. In view of the consensus arrived at between the
parties, the judgment and decree dated 05.01.2011 passed
by the II Additional Principal Judge, Family Court at
Bengaluru in M.C. No.1163/1999 is set-aside.
In the result, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
Brn
