IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD M.F.A. No.8836/2018 (FC) BETWEEN:
SMT. AMARUTHA K. JOSHI D/O. KRISHNA V. JOSHI, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT NO.57, 58 AND 59, SIRSI ROAD, NEAR SIRSI CIRCLE, CHAMARAJPET BANGALORE – 560 018. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI G.R. GURUMATH, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI RATNA N. SHIVAYOGIMATH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI KRISHNA M. GOKHALE S/O. PANDURANGA M. GOKHALE, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, 2. SRI PANDURANGA M. GOKHALE, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, 3. SMT. GAYATHRI P. GOKAHALE W/O. PANDURANGA M. GOKHALE, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.4, H.B. SAMAJA LINK ROAD, GANDHI BAZAAR, BANGALORE – 560 004. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H.S. SURESH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 AND R-3) ***** THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 19(1) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT, 1984, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED: 24.09.2018 PASSED IN MC NO.705/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDITIONAL PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER-WIFE U/S 11(i) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
J U D G M E N T Though this appeal is listed for admission, with consent of learned counsel on both sides, it is heard finally.
2. The appellant herein was the petitioner in M.C.No.705/2018. The said petition was filed under Section 11 (i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking a declaration that the Marriage Certificate dated 29/12/2017 bearing No.CMP-HM674/2017-18 stored in CD No.CMPM32 as null and void and to award damages of Rupees fifty lakhs towards “pain and suffering” and “mental agony”. By judgment dated 24/09/2018, VI Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, has held that petition is not maintainable and has reserved liberty to file an appropriate proceeding before the competent Court of law for appropriate reliefs.
3. We have heard learned senior counsel for appellant and learned counsel for respondents at length and have examined provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the Family Courts Act, 1984.
4. Having regard to the submissions made at the Bar, we are of the view that Family Court was right in dismissing the petition filed under Section 11(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
5. In the circumstances, we do not find any merit in the appeal. Appeal is hence, dismissed. However, liberty is reserved to the appellant to seek appropriate remedy before the appropriate forum and in accordance with law.
Learned counsel for respondents very fairly submits on instructions that as far as the aspect of damages is concerned, the matter is already settled between the parties. He further submits that in the event the appellant is to file a suit or any other proceeding either before the Family Court or before any other forum, respondents may not have any defence in the matter.
Submission of learned counsel for respondents is placed on record.
In view of the above submissions, it is needless to observe that if any suit or other proceeding is filed by the appellant either before the Family Court at Bangalore or any other forum, the said proceeding shall be disposed of expeditiously and in accordance with law, particularly, having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for respondents on instructions from the respondents.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE *mvs