IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.29911 OF 2016 (GM-FC) BETWEEN:
SRI. MAHESH D. YATNALLI S/O SRI. DEVENDRAPPA YATNALLI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT FLAT NO. SF-2, 12TH "A" CROSS 14TH MAIN, SUNSHINE COLONY BTM II STAGE, BANGALORE-560 076. (By Smt.VIJETHA R. NAIK, ADV.) AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BANGALORE SOUTH OFFICE AT KORAMANGALA 6TH BLOCK BANGALORE-560 095.
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER MICO LAYOUT POLICE STATION BANGALORE-560 076.
3. SMT. SUJATHA R @ SARASWATHI W/O MAHESH YATNAHALLI AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT G-01, MANAR MERLIN 12TH "A" CROSS, 14TH MAIN SUNSHINE COLONY BTM II STAGE, BANGALORE-560 076.
… PETITIONER … RESPONDENTS (By Mr. VIJAY KUMAR A. PATIL, AGA FOR R1 & R2 Mr. A.C. BALARAJ, ADV., FOR R3) - - -
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to pass necessary order/direction in the nature of Mandamus by modifying the order passed by the III Addl. Family Court in G & WC No.252/2014 on I.A. 11 dated 13.4.2015 at Annex-E by a direction to the III respondent to hand over the custody of the child every week on Friday evening to the custody of the petitioner and collect the child on Monday morning during the pendency of G & WC No.252/2014 and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing in ‘B’ group this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri.K.B.Monesh Kumar, learned counsel for Smt.Vijetha R.Naik, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.Vijay Kumar A.Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
2. In this petition, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 30.04.2016 passed by the Family Court.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the aforesaid order has been modified by the Trial Court by order dated 21.09.2017 and the aforesaid order has been affirmed by this Court in W.P.No.4339/2018 and connected matters, by order dated 04.06.2018.
4. In view of the aforesaid submissions, nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the suit was filed in the year 2014. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Trial Court to make an endeavour to consider the proceeding in the suit preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
Sd/- JUDGE RV