IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION No.44815 OF 2018(GM-FC) BETWEEN:
SRI AJAY KUMAR MUNUGALA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS S/O VEDA PRAKASH MUNUGALA, PRESENTLY R/AT 12530 MAGNOLIA CIR, JOHN CREEK GA 30005, USA, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI VEDAPRAKASH MUNUGALA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS S/O LATE SRI M VEERAPPA PRESENTLY R/AT 16-2-146/4 DAYANANDA NAGAR, NEW MALAKPET, HYDERABAD AP – 500 036.
..PETITIONER (BY SMT.S SUSHEELA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT.DIVYA K, ADVOCATE) AND:
SMT. SOUMYA MUNUGALA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, W/O AJAY KUMAR MUNUGALA R/AT F- 5, VIDHYA GAYATHRI HOMES 7TH CROSS, GREEN GARDEN LAYOUT MUNNEKOLALU VILLAGE, MARTHAHALLI EXTENSION BENGALURU – 560 037.
ALSO WORKING AT NEXT GEN HEALTHCARE PRITECH PARK SEZ, BLOCK 14B, 4TH FLOOR, OUTER RING ROAD BELLANDUR BENGALURU- 560 103. ALSO AT R/O PAVANI SRESHTA APARTMENT A 207 9TH CROSS, MANJUNATH LAYOUT, MUNNEKOLALU VILLAGE MARTHAHALLI EXTENSION BANGALORE – 560 037.
..RESPONDENT (BY SMT.PRAMILA M NESARGI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI P M RAMACHANDRA, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-A DATED 20.07.2018 IN M.C.No.3252/12 ON IA 34 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT BENGALURU. KINDLY PASS ORDERS ALLOWING IA NO.34, AS PRAYED FOR MODIFYING THE EARLIER ORDER, TO SUIT TO THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Smt.Susheela, learned Senior counsel along with Smt.Divya K., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Smt.Pramila M Nesargi, learned Senior counsel along with Mr.P.M.Ramachandra, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. Petition is admitted for hearing.
3. With the consent of the parties, it is heard finally.
4. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner interalia has assailed the validity of the order dated 20.07.2018 by which application filed by the petitioner seeking modification of the visitation rights has been disposed of.
5. Facts arising to filing of this writ petition are: Petitioner and respondent got married on 09.08.2006 and out of the wedlock, the child namely Vihaan was born on 23.02.2011. It is also not in dispute petitioner is a resident of US and child is in the custody of his mother since 2011. It is not in dispute petitioner has initiated proceedings under Section 7 of the Guardian And Wards Act. It is also not in dispute that respondent has filed M.C.No.3252 of 2012 seeking dissolution of marriage and petitioner has filed petition namely M.C.No.5375 of 2014 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking restitution of conjugal rights. The aforesaid proceedings have been clubbed together and posted for final arguments.
6. The petitioner has filed an application seeking modification of the order dated 18.02.2014 and 05.02.2016 which has been disposed of by order dated 20.07.2018. In the aforesaid factual background petitioner has approached this court.
7. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has made a specific prayer in the writ petition. However, the aforesaid prayer has been dealt with by the respondent in a cryptic and cavalier manner. However application has been disposed of. It is further submitted impugned order be set aside and Family Court may be directed to decide the application filed by the petitioner namely under Section 151 of C.P.C seeking modification of the interim order dated 18.02.2014 and 05.02.2016 at the time of final decision of the petition and Family Court may be directed to conclude the proceedings within time bound manner. Aforesaid submission is not opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent.
8. In view of the aforesaid submission taking into consideration while deciding application under Section 151 of C.P.C filed by the petitioner which the Family Court has not decided with reference to the relief as sought for by the petitioner and has dealt with the same in a cryptic and cavalier manner. The impugned order dated 20.07.2018 is hereby quashed and set aside.
9. Since final arguments has to be heard in the proceedings, taking note of the provisions contained in the Karnataka (Case Flow Management in Subordinate Courts) Rules, 2005, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the Family Court to conclude the proceedings within two months needless to state while deciding the main proceedings, Family Court shall also decide application filed by the petitioner for modification of the order dated 18.02.2014 and 05.02.2016 by a speaking order. Needless to state that the respondent shall get liberty to file objections if so advised to the application filed by petitioner seeking modification.
With the aforesaid directions, petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SBN