Home > Divorce > Family court allows husband’s RCR and Dicrict court allows wife’s RCR !!!

Family court allows husband’s RCR and Dicrict court allows wife’s RCR !!!

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY 2011

 

BEFORE:

THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAN SHANTANAGOUDAI

WRIT PETITION No. 22356/2009 (GM-FC)

Between

 

H.N.Nagaraja Rao

S/o.Y.Nanjunda Rao

Aged about 34 years,

The dynamatic Technologics Ltd.,

E.C. No. 1159,

Peenya H Phase,

T.Dasarahalli,

Bangalore-58. .. Petitioner

( By Sri A.G.Sridher, Advocate)

 

And

 

Smt.Sushma Rari

W/o H.N.Nagaraj Rao,

Major,

Near Kamakshamma Stores

Arche Koppalu

Aias.k,re cst,

Hasar District .. Respondent

(By Sri R.L.Patil, Advocate)

 

 

This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the impugned order in Ex.No.81/05, dated 2.7.2009, at Annexure-a on the file of Hon’ble III AddI. Prl. Family Court, at Bangalore by allowing the execution petition with direction to respondent/judgment debtor to resume/join the matrimonial house of the petitioner or in the alternative, if the judgment debtor/respondent fails to obey the orders of he trial Court and High Court, punish the judgment debtor/respondent by committing her to prison and to give permanent Custody of the child to the petitioner.

This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing n B’ group this day, the Court made the following

ORDER

 

By the impugned order vide Annexure-’ A’, the Executing Courr has closed the Execution petition No.81/2005. The petitioner has questioned the same in this writ petition

2. The records reveal that the petitioner herein is the husband of the respondent. He filed M.C.No.959/2001 before the Family Court,Bangalore, for restitution of conjugal rights. The petition was allowed. In the meanwhile, the respondent herein had filed M.C.No.8/2004 in the Court of Civil Judge€ (Sr.Dn.,) Arasikere, praying for divorce. The said divorce petition filed by the wife was allowed. Questioning the same, the petitioner herein had filed M.F.A.No.8696/2009 before this Court. This Court dismissed the said appeal by the order dated 14.2.2011, confirming the decree o divorce. Since the decree of divorce as ordered by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.,), Arasikere, is confirmed by the Division Bench o this Court, the petitioner herein cannot execute he decree for restitution of conjugal rights passed by the Family Court, Bangalore. Hence, for the different reasons, than the reasons assigned by the Court below, no interference is called for.

Petition for and accordingly, the same stands dismissed.

Sd/a

JUDGE

http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgments/bitstream/123456789/543671/1/WP22356-09-30-05-2011.pdf

Categories: Divorce Tags:
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Fight for Justice

A crusaders blog for inspiring thought.

Stand up for your rights

Gender biased laws

MyNation Foundation - News

News Articles from MyNation, india - News you can use

498afighthard's Blog

Raising Awareness About Gender Biased Laws and its misuse In India

The WordPress.com Blog

The latest news on WordPress.com and the WordPress community.

%d bloggers like this: