IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ M.F.A. No.6697 OF 2017 (FC) BETWEEN:
SRI. HANUMANTH GOUDA PATIL S/O SRI. MUTTANAGOUDA PATIL AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS PRESENTLY WORKING AS CONSTABLE IN SASHASTRA SEEMA BAL 30 B.N.S.S.B. DIRANG (ARUNACHALA PRADESH) STATE ARUNACHALA PRADESH-790101 (BUT EARLIER ADDRESS HAS BEEN SHOWN IN THE CAUSE TITLE BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT) AND PERMANENT RESIDENT OF YATTINAHALLI VILLAGE, POST GUDAGURE RANEBENNUR TALUK DISTRICT HAVERI PIN-581115 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADVOCATE) AND:
SMT. SHAKTHI DUDIHALLI @ KAVITH W/O SRI. HANUMANTH GOUDA PATIL D/O SRI GADIGEPPA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS C/O MANJUNATH DUDIHALLI R/AT NO 152, 8TH BLOCK KSRTC QUARTERS, SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU-560027 ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K. GURUDATTA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. A.C. BALARAJ, ADVOCATE) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT 1984, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 24.04.2016 PASSED IN M.C.NO.4947/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT.
THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
J U D G M E N T The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the delay of 461 days in filing the appeal has occurred on account of fact that the impugned judgment and decree passed under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is virtually an exparte one and therefore, delay in filing the appeal may be condoned. He further submits that the appellant has also filed M.C.No.61/2014 before the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Ranebennur against the respondent-wife under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Act seeking dissolution of the marriage on the ground of cruelty and desertion. By judgment and decree dated 24.04.2019, the said petition has been allowed and the marriage between the parties has been dissolved. Hence, virtually this appeal has become infructuous.
2. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is a possibility of respondent assailing the judgment and decree dated 24.04.2019 passed in M.C.No.61/2014 by Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Ranebennur before this Court.
3. By way of response, learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the event the respondent assails the judgment and decree passed in M.C.No.61/2014 before this Court and if he is successful in the said appeal, then liberty may be reserved to the appellant to revive this appeal.
4. Submission of the learned counsel for the respective parties is placed on record.
5. In the circumstances, this appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous in view of judgment and decree passed in favour of the appellant in M.C.No.61/2014. However, in the event the respondent herein is successful in getting the judgment and decree passed in M.C.No.61/2014 dated 24.04.2019 set aside at the hands of this Court, then, liberty is reserved to the appellant herein to revive this appeal.
In view of dismissal of the appeal, applications also stand disposed of for the present, subject to the same being revived in the event the appeal is revived by the appellant herein.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Prs*