Smt.D.V.Gayathri vs Sri.G.Sheshadri
2023 Latest Caselaw 764 Kant

                                              -1-
                                                        MFA No. 2299 of 2015
                                                    C/W MFA No. 4813 of 2020




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                         DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023
                                          PRESENT
                           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
                                              AND
                       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY
                      MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2299 OF 2015 (FC)
                                              C/W
                      MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4813 OF 2020 (FC)


                 IN M.F.A. NO.2299 OF 2015:
                 BETWEEN:

                 1.    SMT. D.V. GAYATHRI
                       W/O SRI G S SHESHADRI
                       AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
                       WORKING AS STENOGRAPHER
                       IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT
Digitally
signed by              QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION
RUPA V                 OFFICE OF EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MYSURU
Location: High         RESIDING AT NO.926A, 4TH MAIN, 28TH CROSS
Court of               VIDYARANYAPURAM, MYSURU CITY.
Karnataka
                                                                ...APPELLANT
                 (BY SRI. L. SRINIVASA BABU, ADV., (ABSENT))

                 AND:

                 1.    SRI. G. SHESHADRI
                       S/O G V SRINIVASA IYENGAR
                       AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
                       EMPLOYEE OF CAUVERY KALPATHARU
                       GRAMEENA BANK
                       DASANAPURA BRANCH
                              -2-
                                          MFA No. 2299 of 2015
                                      C/W MFA No. 4813 of 2020




     NELAMANGALA TALUK
     BANGALORE-562123.

                                               ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. T. SUBRAMANYA, ADV., (ABSENT))
                             *****
      THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 19(1) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT,

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:20.02.2015

PASSED IN M.C.NO.115/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE,

ADDITIONAL   FAMILY   COURT,         MYSORE,   ALLOWING   THE

PETITION FILED U/S 13(1)(ia) & (ib) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT,

FOR DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE.



IN M.F.A. NO. 4813 OF 2020
BETWEEN:

1.   SMT. D.V. GAYATHRI
     W/O SRI G S SHESHADRI
     AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
     WORKING AS STENOGRAPHER
     IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT
     QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION
     OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
     MYSURU
     RESIDING AT NO.926A 4TH MAIN
     28TH CORSS, VIDYARANYAPURAM
     MYSURU CITY-570002.
                                                  ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI. L. SRINIVASA BABU, ADV., (ABSENT))
                            -3-
                                     MFA No. 2299 of 2015
                                 C/W MFA No. 4813 of 2020




AND:

1.   SRI. G. SHESHADRI
     S/O G V SRINIVASA IYENGAR
     AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
     RESIDING AT PERIYAPATNA TOWN
     PERIYAPATNA TALUK
     MYSURU DISTRICT-571107.

                                          ...RESPONDENT



(BY SRI. T. SUBRAMANYA, ADV., (ABSENT))


       THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.19(1) OF THE FAMILY COURTS

ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DT.20.02.2015

PASSED IN MC NO.265/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE,

ADDITIONAL FAMILY COURT, MYSURU, DISMISSING THE

PETITION FILED U/S.9 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT FOR

RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS.



       THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS

DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                            -4-
                                     MFA No. 2299 of 2015
                                 C/W MFA No. 4813 of 2020




                     JUDGMENT

None had appeared on behalf of the appellant even

on 10.01.2023.

None appeared on behalf of the appellant even

when the matter is called in the second round today.

It appears, the appellant is not interested in

prosecuting the appeals.

Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed for want of

prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

SS