Karnataka High Court
Smt. Deepali Lengade vs Sri. Sandeep Lengade on 9 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:39864-DB
MFA No. 675 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 675 OF 2025 (FC)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. DEEPALI LENGADE,
D/O. LATE JUSTICE A.C.KABBIN,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/O.No.194, 5TH MAIN, JUDICIAL LAYOUT,
THALAGHATTAPURA, MALLASANDRA,
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU 560 062.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI K.N. PHANEENDRA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. VAISHALI HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. SANDEEP LENGADE,
S/O. SHASHIKANT LENGADE,
Digitally AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
signed by K G R/O. No.3184, SOBHA ARENA,
RENUKAMBA JUDICIAL LAYOUT, KANAKAPURA ROAD,
Location: THALAGHATTAPURA, BENGALURU 560 062.
HIGH COURT
OF 2. SMT. USHA MOGRAL,
KARNATAKA W/O. NAGARATHNAM REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
R/O. No.84, NEXT TO DRUG HOUSE PHARMACY,
3RD CROSS, OLD BANK COLONY,
CHUNCHAGHATTA MAIN ROAD,
KONANAKUNTE, BANGALORE 560 062.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S. BALAKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:39864-DB
MFA No. 675 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF FAMILY
COURT ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
26.11.2024 PASSED ON I.A. No.11 IN M.C.No.5412/2021 ON THE
FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT,
BENGALURU, ALLOWING THE I.A.No.11 FILED UNDER ORDER VII
RULE 11(d) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC.
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 K. V. ARAVIND
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The appellant and the respondent No.1 are
present in person, who have been identified by their
respective counsels.
3. The appellant and the respondent No.1 are wife
and husband respectively. Under challenge in the instant
appeal is an order dated 26.11.2024 passed by the Court
of V Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru,
on I.A.No.11 filed in M.C. No.5412/2021. A further relief
has been sought for a direction to the respondent No.1 to
NC: 2025:KHC:39864-DB
HC-KAR
pay the arrears of interim maintenance to the appellant
from 22.10.2021 till date, at the rate of Rs.1,50,000/- per
month.
4. It appears from the order impugned that,
I.A.No.11 was filed by the respondent No.1 under Order
VII Rule 11(d) read with 151 of Code of Civil Procedure,
19081 to reject the petition of the petitioner for want of
territorial jurisdiction of the Court. The I.A.No.11 was
allowed and the petitioner was directed to be returned to
the petitioner for its presentation before the jurisdictional
Court within a period of one month.
5. It is stated by the learned counsel for the
parties that the petition of the appellant under Section
13(1)(i) and (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 19552 has
been re-presented before the competent Court.
CPC
H.M. Act
NC: 2025:KHC:39864-DB
HC-KAR
6. Today, a Joint Compromise Petition under Order
XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of CPC has been filed
in Court, which is taken on record.
7. The signatories to the agreement are the
aforesaid appellant and Respondent No.1. It is jointly
contended by the counsel for the parties that, by means of
this agreement/compromise, the parties have sought to
settle their differences and the compromise also
completely addresses the various disputes pending
between the parties in various courts of law, including this
High Court. The aforesaid agreement/compromise has
been signed on each page by the appellant and the
Respondent No.1, and their signatures have been
identified on page 9, by their respective advocates.
8. We have perused the terms of the settlement
as appearing in the aforesaid agreement/compromise.
The parties are present in Court, who state that they have
made their signatures on each page of their compromise
petition and they have filed the photo copies of their
NC: 2025:KHC:39864-DB
HC-KAR
Aadhar Card/PAN Card, which have been duly signed by
them and verified by their respective advocates.
9. Given the fact that the application/petition for
divorce is stated to have been already re-presented before
the appropriate Court, in pursuance of the impugned order
of 26.11.2024, the counsel for the parties state that the
parties are not at an issue that the instant petition has
been rendered infructuous. However, they pray that the
compromise petition be taken on record. The joint
compromise petition is accepted by the Court.
10. We find, however, that among the several
terms of settlement which have been mentioned in the
joint compromise petition, a prayer has also been made to
dissolve the marriage solemnized between the appellant
and the Respondent No.1 on 11.02.2001 at Miraj in
Maharashtra State. Since this Court is not in seisen of the
petition filed by the appellant before the Family Court that
has been re-presented pursuant to the order dated
26.11.2024 passed by the Family Court, no decree can be
NC: 2025:KHC:39864-DB
HC-KAR
passed by this Court with regard to dissolving the
marriage. However, the dissolution of marriage as well as
the other terms in the joint compromise petition can well
be dealt with by the Court which is in seisen of the divorce
petition, in accordance with law, which is stated to be
pending before the II Additional Senior Civil Judge,
Bengaluru Rural District, being M.C.No.9/2025. As
regards the other terms of settlement, the parties shall act
upon it and not create any situation that may lead to any
other dispute arising between them. All steps shall be
taken expeditiously, so that the matter can be concluded
successfully and satisfactorily.
11. The parties are directed to approach the Court
concerned before which the divorce petition is pending on
29.10.2025. If by chance, the Court is not available or is
not functioning on 29.10.2025, the parties shall appear on
the next working day.
NC: 2025:KHC:39864-DB
HC-KAR
12. The parties shall be present in Court when the
Court assembles and shall make appropriate application/s
along with the certified copy of the order passed today.
13. The Registrar concerned is requested to send
the original of the Joint Compromise Petition to the Court
concerned after retaining a copy of the same.
14. It shall be open for the Family Court to pass
necessary orders in accordance with law and expeditiously,
in respect of the Joint Compromise Petition, which will
form part of the decree.
15. Subject to the aforesaid observations, this
appeal stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(JAYANT BANERJI)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(K. V. ARAVIND)
JUDGE
MV,KGR
