Karnataka High Court
Aditya Bal vs Elena Milyakova Bal on 20 February, 2025
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:7658
CRL.RP No. 1677 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1677 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
ADITYA BAL
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
S/O RAKESH BAL
R/A B 801, CENTRAL PARK,
SECTOR 42
HARYANA-122 002
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ARUN GOVINDRAJ, ADVOCATE)
AND:
ELENA MILYAKOVA BAL,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
W/O ADITYA BAL,
Digitally signed R/O 12/2 (A/1),
by DEVIKA M
STEPHENS ROAD,
Location: HIGH 1ST FLOOR, FRAZER TOWN
COURT OF
KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 005.
ALSO AT NO.301
SRI RESIDENCY,
4/15, 50 FEET ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 094
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. GEETA MENON, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR
THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT PASSED
ON 11.09.2023 IN CRL.A.NO.2524/2019 BY THE LXIIIV ADDITIONAL
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:7658
CRL.RP No. 1677 of 2023
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-64), BENGALURU
(ANNEXURE-A) AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE LXIIIV
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-64),
BENGALURU FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION CLUB BOTH THE APPEALS
i.e. CRL.A.NO.2451/2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE LV
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-56),
BENGALURU (ANNEXURE-G1) AND CRL.A.NO.2524/2019 FILED BY
THE RESPONDENT BEFORE LXII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-64), BENGALURU AND FOR COMMON
HEARING AND DISPOSAL (ANNEXURE-H1).
THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the revision petitioner and
learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This Revision Petition is filed against the order of
the Appellate Court and learned counsel for the revision
petitioner would contend that the Appellate Court disposed of
the matter even when the appeal filed by the revision petitioner
was pending in other court and did not bring to the notice of
the Appellate Court at the time of disposal of the appeal.
Learned counsel also filed a memo along with copy of
NC: 2025:KHC:7658
acknowledgment of having served a copy of
Crl.A.No.2451/2019 and the same is not in respect of the
appeal filed by the appellant and a copy was served on the
other side. However, learned counsel relies upon the
statement of objections, wherein filing of appeal was pending
before the Court has been mentioned.
3. As against the submission, learned counsel for the
respondent brought to the notice of this Court that though the
appeal by the revision petitioner was filed in the year 2019,
process fee was not paid and steps were not taken. But, only
after the disposal of the appeal filed by the respondent, notice
was served. Hence, he cannot find fault with the respondent as
well as with the Court.
4. Having perused the order sheet of the Appellate
Court, wherein notice has been served on revision
petitioner's father. However, the Appellate Court has taken
note that both parties and their counsel were absent and if the
counsel has not filed Vakalathnama, the question of appearance
does not arise. However, taking into note of fact that when two
appeals were pending before the Appellate Court for
NC: 2025:KHC:7658
consideration of the impugned order passed by the Trial Court,
it ought to have been considered together and the revision
petitioner did not bring to the notice of the Appellate Court and
also the ordersheet discloses that though the appeal was filed
in the year 2019, steps were not taken and kept on continuing
of the proceedings without taking steps and only after disposal
of the appeal, the present revision petition is filed.
5. Having taken note of the said fact into
consideration, when two appeals are pending before the Court,
it was not brought to the notice of the Appellate Court either by
both the parties. However, the matter was disposed of on
merits and having taken note of the said fact into
consideration, it is appropriate to direct the Appellate Court
by setting aside the order of the Appellate Court and
the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is
directed to transfer Crl.A.No.2451/2019 to learned LXII
Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, and both
Crl.A.No.2524/2019 filed by the respondent and
Crl.A.No.2451/2019 filed by the revision petitioner to be placed
before the learned LXII Additional City Civil and Sessions
Judge, Bengaluru, to be considered together on merits.
NC: 2025:KHC:7658
6. Having taken note of the conduct of the petitioner,
even though the appeal was filed in the year 2019, the notice
was not served on the respondent and steps were not taken till
disposal of other appeal. Hence, it is appropriate to impose
cost of Rs.50,000/- and the same is payable to the respondent
within two weeks from today. Parties are directed to appear
before the learned LXII Additional City Civil and Sessions
Judge, Bengaluru, (CCH-64) on 11.03.2025 and the Principal
City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is directed to place
the other appeal before the very same Court to consider the
same. Revision petitioner is also directed to pay a sum of
Rs.10,000/- per month awarded by the Trial Court from the
date of the application till today and also pay 50% of the
compensation amount awarded by the trial Court i.e.,
Rs.2,50,000/- out of Rs.5,00,000/- within four weeks from
today. The Appellate Court is also directed to dispose of the
matter within 45 days from 11.03.2025. The amount whatever
paid by the revision petitioner has to be deducted in the total
amount.
NC: 2025:KHC:7658
With these observations, this revision petition is
disposed of. The Registry is directed to communicate this
order forthwith to the Presiding Officer as well as the Principal
City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, to enable the Court
to take up the matter on 11.03.2025.
Sd/-
(H.P.SANDESH)
JUDGE
AV
