IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO. 54873/2014 (GM-FC) BETWEEN:
SRI. N. VENKATESH @ AMEER AHMED S/O LATE K.R. NANJUNDASWAMY, AGED 41 YEARS, R/O NO. 903, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE 560034 AND ALSO R/AT NO.12, SOMASUNDARAPALYA, HSR 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE 560034.
(BY SRI. R PRAMOD, ADV.) AND 1. A. BEGUM @ VEDA W/O SRI M. VENKATESH, AGED 35 YEARS, 2. MASTER V SANJAY S/O. SMT. A. BEGUM @ VEDA MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN A. BEGUM @ VEDA 3. M.S. SINDHUSHREE D/O SMT. A. BEGUM @ VEDA MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER ... PETITIONER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN A. BEGUM @ VEDA R1 TO R3 ARE R/O 7-21/5, 3RD CROSS, HENNUR MAIN ROAD, LINGARAJAPURAM, ST. THOMAS TOWN, BANGALORE 560084.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V B SHIVAKUMAR, ADV.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS ON THE FILE OF VI ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT BANGALORE IN C.MIS.196/2013; QUASH THE ANNEX-F DTD.23.9.2013 PASSED BY VI ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE FAMILY COURT IN C.MIS.NO.196/2013.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri. R. Pramod, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri. V. B. Shivakumar, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner assails the validity of the order dated 23.09.2014 passed by the Family Court by which the Family Court has allowed the application preferred by the respondents herein under Section 125(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure and has directed the petitioner herein to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month to the 1st respondent herein and Rs.20,000/- per month towards the school and educational expenses of respondents 2 and 3 herein from the date of application till the disposal of the case.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. The writ petition is pending before this Court since 2014. A Bench of this Court had passed an interim order dated 04.02.2015 by which the operation and effect of the order dated 23.09.2014 was stayed subject to the condition that the petitioner makes payment of Rs.5,000/- per month to the 1st respondent.
The matter is pending before this Court for more than five years. Therefore, at this point of time, I am not inclined to adjudicate the validity of the order which has been impugned in this writ petition and deem it appropriate to dispose of the same with a direction to the Family Court to conclude the proceedings, if not already concluded, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order passed today. Needless to state that in case the Family Court does not dispose of the proceedings within a period of four months from today, the petitioner shall be at liberty to seek revival of this writ petition.
With the aforesaid liberty, the petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE VP