Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 7873 Kant
Judgement Date : 29 August, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:33497-DB
MFA No. 2473 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2473 OF 2024 (FC)
BETWEEN:
PRASHANTH.D.S,
S/O D.SHIVALINGEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/AT PRASHANTH NILAYA,
2ND FLOOR, NEAR BHAVANA MEDICAL,
ADUVALLI MAIN ROAD,
HASSAN CITY.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.B.PURANDARA., ADVOCATE)
Digitally AND:
signed by K G
RENUKAMBA
Location: NANDINI.C,
HIGH COURT W/O PRASHANTH.D.S,
OF
KARNATAKA D/O CHIKKANNA,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
R/AT HOUSE NO.9, 2ND CROSS,
HUTTA COLONY, APPA CIRCLE,
BHADRAVATHI,
SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 301.
...RESPONDENT
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:33497-DB
MFA No. 2473 of 2024
HC-KAR
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 19(1) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 09.01.2024
PASSED IN M.C.NO.144/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF
PRL.JUDGE, 1ST ADDITIONAL FAMILY COURT, HASSAN,
ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE
HINDU MARRIAGE ACT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)
Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
2. This appeal has been filed seeking to challenge
an order dated 09.01.2024 passed by the Principal Judge,
I Additional Family Court, Hassan in MC.No.144/2018, to
the extent it directs payment of arrears of maintenance,
as ordered in Crl.Misc.No.312/2018 dated 07.09.2021 by
the IV Additional JMFC, Bhadravathi, within three months.
Obviously, as evident from the order impugned, the appeal
under Section of 9 the Hindu Marriage Act was
NC: 2025:KHC:33497-DB
HC-KAR
conditionally allowed, which was made subject to payment
of the entire arrears of maintenance as ordered in the
criminal miscellaneous case. Admittedly, the arrears of
maintenance as ordered by the Family Court have not
been deposited. The effect of it is that the appeal filed
under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, stood rejected.
3. Since it is only the aspect of payment of arrears
of maintenance that is under challenge in the instant
appeal, we see no reason to vary the judgment/decree
impugned. This appeal is therefore dismissed.
Sd/-
(JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE
Sd/-
(UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE
PK
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!