IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR R.P.F.C. NO.164 OF 2014 BETWEEN:
1. SRI.C.P.RANGAPPA, S/O LATE CHINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O NO.31/D, LAXMI NIVAS, 5TH MAIN ROAD, HEBBAL, BENGALURU – 560024.
2. SRI.R.CHETAN, S/O SRI C.RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/O NO.31/D, LAXMI NIVAS, 5TH MAIN ROAD, HEBBAL, BENGALURU – 560024. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI.ANUPAMA HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SMT.PREMA KUMARI, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC:TEACHER, GOVERNMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL, CHENNAMANAHALLI, TQ:RAMANAGAR, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-573130.
2. SRI R.CHANDAN, S/O SRI.C.RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, C/O SRI PREMA KUMARI, GOVERNMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL, CHENNAMANAHALLI, TQ:RAMANAGAR, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-573130. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.U.SHIVA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) **** THIS R.P.F.C. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF FAMILY COURT ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.06.2014 PASSED IN CRL.MISC.466/2003 ON THE FILE OF I-ADDL. PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 127 OF CR.P.C.
THIS R.P.F.C. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Though this matter is listed for admission, with the consent of the learned counsel for both the parties the arguments are heard for final disposal.
2. This petition is filed for setting aside the order dated 20.06.2014 in Crl.Misc. No.466/2003 passed by the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru.
3. The petitioners in Crl.Misc.No.466/2003 are the petitioners herein. They have challenged the impugned order dated 20.06.2014 which reads as under:
“ The application filed by the respondent under Section 127 of Cr.P.C. is hereby partly allowed.
The respondent is directed to pay maintenance amount of Rs.400/- each per month to the minor petitioner No.2 and 3 from January, 1999 till May, 2000 to the first petitioner.”
4. The counsel for the respondent submits that the direction issued in Crl.Misc. No.466/2003 is complied with by making the payment as per the impugned order. Under these circumstances, the petition does not survive for consideration.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has no objection for disposal of this petition in view of the payment said to have been done by the respondent. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ykl