IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY MFA No.23709 OF 2013 (MC) C/W MFA No.101143 OF 2014
IN MFA NO.23709 OF 2013
BETWEEN
VIDYA W/O MAHADEV PATIL AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK WORK, R/O : C/O : VITHAL PUNDALIK PATIL AT POST CHANNEWADI VILLAGE, TAL : KHANAPUR DIST: BELGAUM. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI.SANJAY S KATAGERI, ADV.)
AND
MAHADEV S/O VITHAL PATIL AGE : 31 YEARS, OCC : ENGINEER IN BSF (WATER WING), R/O : RANKUNDAYE VILLAGE, AT POST : SANTI BASTWAD, TQ. & DIST. BELGAUM
NOW RESIDING AT NO.2B, LORD SINHA ROAD, KOLKATA – WEST BENGAL STATE ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.MRUTYUNJAY TATA BANGI, ADV.)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.19(1) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT 1984, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE
2
DATED:01.08.2013, PASSED IN MATRIMONIAL CASE NO.256/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE FAMILY COURT BELGAUM, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED U/SEC.9 OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT.
IN MFA NO.101143 OF 2014
BETWEEN
VIDYA W/O. MAHADEV PATIL AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O. C/O. VITHAL PUNDALIK PATIL, AT POST: CHANNEWADI VILLAGE, KASABA NANDGAD. TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELGAUM ... APPELLANT (BY SRI.SANJAY S KATAGERI, ADV.)
AND
MAHADEV S/O. VITHAL PATIL AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: ENGINEER IN BSF (WATER WING), R/O. RANKUNDAYE VILLAGE, AT POST: SANTI BASTWAD, TQ & DIST: BELGAUM NOW R/AT. NO.2B, LORD SINHA ROAD KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL STATE ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.MRUTYUNJAY TATA BANGI, ADV.)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 28 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955, AGAINST JUDGMENT AND DECREE DTD: 25.03.2014, PASSED IN MC NO. 34/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KHANAPUR, THE PETITION FILED U/S.13(1)(1-A) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 IS ALLOWED.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING , THIS DAY, P.B.BAJANTHRI J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
JUDGMENT
These two appeals were filed by the wife
Smt.Vidya. Appellant and respondent got married on
29.05.2010 in terms of Hindu customs and rights at
Nandgad village. The respondent is serving in the
Border Security Force. Whereas the appellant is a house wife. There were certain domestic issues cropped up among the parties, which has resulted in filing of petition under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage
Act,1956 by the husband and it was numbered as MC
No.34/2011. Whereas, MC No.256/2011 was filed by the appellant-wife under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage
Act, for conjugal rights.
2. On 01.08.2013, MC No.256/2011 filed under Section 9 was dismissed. Whereas, MC
No.34/2011 filed under Section 13(1)(i-a) of Hindu
Marriage Act was allowed on 25.03.2014. In this background, appellant-wife Smt.Vidya presented these
4 two appeals in the year 2013-2014. On 23.04.2014,
Interim Order was granted staying the operation of the
Judgment passed in MC No.34/2011 dated 25.03.2014 and it was in operation. Whereas, the respondent- husband violated the interim order dated 23.03.2014 while re-marrying. Similarly, the appellant-Smt.Vidya was also re-married. In this background, Judgment in
MC No.34/2011 dated 25.03.2014 is upheld.
Consequently, order passed in MC No.256/2011 dated
01.08.2013 do not survive for consideration.
3. For having violated the interim order dated
23.04.2014 of this Court in MFA No.101143/2014, by the respondent-husband, he is liable to pay cost of
Rs.10,000/- to the High Court Legal Services
Committee, High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench,
Dharwad within four weeks from today.
4. In view of the later development, the present appeals stands disposed in the above terms.
5
IA No.1/2013 does not survive for consideration since the main appeals are disposed off.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE
Hmb