Karnataka High Court
Smt. Unnati Jain vs Sri. Naveen Kumar Siyal on 7 July, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:24519
W.P. No.50476/2019
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JULY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
WRIT PETITION NO.50476/2019 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SMT. UNNATI JAIN
WIFE OF NAVEEN KUMAR SIYAL
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/AT. RATNA KANCHAN VILLA
NO.204, HILINK SOCIETY
Digitally signed NEAR AERODRUM, INDORE
by RUPA V MADYAPRADESH 452005.
Location: High ...PETITIONER
Court of (BY SRI. P. PRASAD, ADV.,)
karnataka
AND:
SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR SIYAL
SON OF LATE B. PUSHALAL SIYAL
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT. NO.190, NARAYANAPILLAI STREET
BHARATHI NAGAR, BANGALORE 560001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. G.R. MOHAN, ADV.,)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
ORDER DATED 08.08.2019 ON THE INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION
ON I.A.NO.3 IN EX.NO.126/2019 IN THE COURT OF THE II
ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, AT BANGALORE
UNDER ANNEXURE-F. ALLOW INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION FILED
BY THE PETITIONER IN I.A.NO.5, FILED UNDER ORDER XXI RULE 29
R/W SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 IN
EX.NO.126/2019 IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL
JUDGE FAMILY COURT, AT BANGALORE UNDER ANNEXURE-D & ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:24519
W.P. No.50476/2019
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
(a) set aside the impugned order dated 08.08.2019, on
the interlocutory application on IA.No.3, in
Ex.No.126/2019 in the Court of the II additional Principal
Judge, Family Court, At Bangalore, under Annexure-F,
(b) Allow interlocutory application filed by the
petitioner in IA.No.5, filed under Order XXI Rule 29 read
with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in
Ex.No.126/2019 in the Court of the II additional Principal
Judge Family Court, At Bangalore, under Annexure-D."
2. Sri.P.Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner is the mother of the minor ward. It
is submitted that due to the matrimonial disputes, the
petitioner and respondent are residing separately and the
petitioner is residing at Indore, Madhya Pradesh and the
respondent is residing at Bengaluru. The respondent has
obtained exparte judgment and decree before the Family Court,
wherein the Family Court has appointed the respondent as the
guardian of the minor ward "Dharvi Siyal" and directed that the
respondent is entitled to permanent custody of the minor child.
NC: 2025:KHC:24519
HC-KAR
It is submitted that the child is now aged about 13 years and
from the date of birth she is in the care and custody of the
petitioner. The order of the Family Court being exparte, the
petitioner challenged the same in Misc.Petition No.75/2019
seeking to restore the same. Pending the said petition, the
respondent has filed Execution No.126/2019 and in the said
case and the Family Court allowed I.A.No.3 filed by the
respondent and ordered to provide police help to assist the
respondent in implementing the order dated 01.04.2019 passed
in G & WC No.140/2018. It is submitted that if the said order is
allowed to be enforced, it would cause great hardship to the
minor ward as the minor ward has grown in the custody of the
mother from the date of birth, hence, he seeks to allow the
petition.
3. Per contra, Sri.G.R.Mohan, learned counsel for
respondent submits that the order of the Family Court dated
01.04.2019, though exparte, has attained finality as the
Miscellaneous Petition filed by the petitioner has been
dismissed. It is submitted that this Court by detailed order on
20.01.2020 has made an arrangement of visitation right and
NC: 2025:KHC:24519
HC-KAR
the same has not been implemented by the parties as the
respondent is suffering from serious health issues. It is further
submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of by granting
liberty to the respondent to move the execution Court, if need
arises and if the health condition of the respondent is
improved.
4. The submission of learned counsel for the
respondent is placed on record.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material
available on record.
6. The undisputed facts are that the petitioner is the
wife and the respondent is the husband and out of the wedlock
"Dharvi Siyal" is born on 23.09.2012. The material on record
indicate that the minor daughter is in the care and custody of
the petitioner from the date of her birth and due to the
matrimonial dispute, the petitioner and the respondent are
residing at different places. It is also brought to the notice of
the Court that the minor child is pursuing education at Indore,
NC: 2025:KHC:24519
HC-KAR
Madhya Pradesh. When things stood thus, the respondent filed
Execution No.126/2019 before the Family Court, Bengaluru and
in the said proceedings, IA No.3 is filed seeking direction to the
Senior Superintendent of Police, Indore, Madhya Pradesh to
secure the custody of the minor child. The said application
came to be allowed under the impugned order by directing the
Senior Superintendent of Police, S.P.Office, Regal Square,
Indore, Madhya Pradesh to assist the respondent in
implementing the order dated 01.04.2019 passed in G &
WC.No.140/2018. In my considered view, the Family Court
ought to have taken note of the fact that the order dated
01.04.2019 is an exparte order and thereafter an application is
filed for restoration of the said proceedings. Be that as it may.
Now, a categorical statement is made by the learned counsel
for the respondent that respondent is suffering from serious
health issues, hence, he is unable to implement the order dated
01.04.2019 as well as the interim order granted by this Court
on 20.01.2020. When things stood thus, I am of the considered
view that the interest of justice would be met if the petition is
disposed of by quashing the impugned order dated 08.08.2019
and by permitting the respondent to implement the order dated
NC: 2025:KHC:24519
HC-KAR
01.04.2019 passed in G & WC No.140/2018, if need arises.
With the above observations, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i. The writ petition is allowed.
ii. The impugned order dated 08.08.2019 passed
on I.A.No.3 in Execution No.126/2019 by the II
Additional Principal Judge Family Court,
Bengaluru, is hereby set aside.
iii. The respondent is at liberty to implement the
order dated 01.04.2019 passed in G & WC
No.140/2018 by the II Additional Principal
Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, if need arises.
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
JUDGE
BSR
