Sri Madhusudan Devarajan vs Smt Vanita M .K
2024 Latest Caselaw 6792 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Sri Madhusudan Devarajan vs Smt Vanita M .K on 7 March, 2024

Author: H.P.Sandesh

Bench: H.P.Sandesh

                                               -1-
                                                              NC: 2024:KHC:9540
                                                         CRL.RP No. 132 of 2024




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                            DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

                                            BEFORE

                             THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

                         CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 132 OF 2024

                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    SRI MADHUSUDAN DEVARAJAN
                         S/O LATE DEVARAJAN H.M.
                         AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
                         R/AT D.NO.43, SRINIVASA KRUPA
                         GAYATHIRPURAM, 1ST STAGE
                         UDYAGIRI POST
                         MYSURU - 571 430.
                                                                  ...PETITIONER

                            (BY SRI. GAURAV SUBRAMANYAM, ADVOCATE)
                   AND:

                   1.    SMT. VANITA M.K.,
                         W/O MADHUSUDHAN DEVARAJAN
                         AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
Digitally signed
by SHARANYA T            R/AT D.NO.3076/02
Location: HIGH           AMMA GOKULAM PARK ROAD
COURT OF                 NIRMALA CONVENT ROAD
KARNATAKA
                         MYSURU - 570002.
                                                              ...RESPONDENT
                                 (BY SRI AJIT KALYAN, ADVOCATE)

                         THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C
                   PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.08.2023 IN
                   CRL.A.NO.207/2022 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND
                   SESSIONS JUDGE COURT AT MYSORE WHICH CONFIRMED THE
                   ORDER DATED 24.02.2020 ON APPLICATION U/S 20(d) OF D.V
                   ACT PASSED BY THE HONBLE VI ADDL.I CIVIL JUDGE AND
                   J.M.F.C COURT AT MYSORE.
                                -2-
                                              NC: 2024:KHC:9540
                                        CRL.RP No. 132 of 2024




     THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                              ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

counsel for the respondent.

2. This revision petition is filed with regard to non-

payment of school fee of the child. Having taken note of non-

payment of amount and also bouncing of the Cheque given by

the petitioner herein, claim was made before the Trial Court to

pay the school fee of the child belonging to the petitioner.

Hence, an application was filed before the Trial Court under

Section 20(d) of the Domestic Violence Act and the Trial Court

considered the same and there is no dispute with regard to the

marriage and the fact that child is admitted to the school. The

Trial Court also taken note of the fact that in view of non-

payment of school fee, the School Authority directed to pay the

amount. Hence, the Trial Court taking note of the fact that it is

the duty of the father to meet the educational expenses of the

child, observed that in view of non-payment of educational

expenses, the future of the child should not be affected.

Hence, ordered to pay the amount by allowing the application.

NC: 2024:KHC:9540

3. Now, the learned counsel for the petitioner would

submit that the respondent is also having properties and those

properties are purchased by the revision petitioner in the name

of the respondent and respondent has also sold one of the

properties. Learned counsel for the respondent would submit

that even the petitioner has also sold the property and all these

aspects have to be considered while considering the matter on

merits and still C.Mis.No.90/2018 is pending before the Trial

Court and liberty is reserved to both the parties to urge their

grounds with regard to the capability of the payment of the

school fee by the respective parties. However, the question

involved in this petition is only regard to earlier payment made

by way Cheque on 25.07.2018 has bounced and not paid the

school fee and the said fact is also considered by the Trial Court

and also First Appellate Court, while considering the appeal.

The Trial Court, while considering the application, allowed the

application directing the petitioner to pay the amount within 15

days.

4. Having considered the reasoning given by the Trial

Court and also the First Appellate Court, the same is with

regard to payment of school fee of the child of the petitioner.

NC: 2024:KHC:9540

When such being the case, I do not find any error committed

by the Trial Court in passing an order directing the revision

petition to meet the school fee of the child and it has been

brought to notice of this Court that the petitioner has made the

payment and hence, the matter does not survive for

consideration.

Accordingly, the revision petition is disposed of. Liberty

is reserved to the petitioner to urge all his contentions in

C.Mis.No.90/2018 which is pending before the Trial Court

Sd/-

JUDGE

ST