Karnataka High Court
RPFC/19/2026 of JAGADISH Vs ASHWITHA T M on 18 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010052472026 NC: 2026:KHC:51293 RPFC No. 19 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 19 OF 2026 BETWEEN: JAGADISH AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS S/O MALLAIAH
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010052472026
NC: 2026:KHC:51293
RPFC No. 19 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 19 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
JAGADISH
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
S/O MALLAIAH
CHIKKOLALE VILLAGE
KABBINAHALLI POST.
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHRUTHI S.P.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
ASHWITHA T M @ KURUMA
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
D/O MANJAPPA
TRIPURA VILLAGE
BETTAGERE POST
BANKAL HOBLI
MUDIGERE
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. MURTHY D.L., ADVOCATE)
THIS RPFC IS FILED U/S. 19(4) OF FAMILY COURT ACT
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04.09.2025, PASSED IN CRL. MISC. NO. 9/25 ON THE FILE OF THE
PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT CHIKKAMAGALURU, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED U/S. 144 OF BNSS FOR
MAINTENANCE.
Digitally
signed by
SUVARNA T
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010052472026
NC: 2026:KHC:51293
RPFC No. 19 of 2026
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
This petition is of the year 2026. When this matter came up on 07.09.2026, as there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and this court had directed the matter to be listed under the caption for ‘dismissal’ on 17.09.2026. Even on 17.09.2026, there was no representation and the matter was directed to be listed today under the same caption.
Today i.e., 18.09.2026, when the matter came up, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, it appears that the petitioner is not interested to pursue the matter.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for non- prosecution.
SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE
BH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11