Karnataka High Court
RPFC/172/2026 of SRI R NAGAMALLESWAMY Vs SMT. GAYATHRI D on 11 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010444272026 NC: 2026:KHC:49769 RPFC No. 172 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 172 OF 2026 BETWEEN: SRI. R. NAGAMALLESWAMY S/O RANGASWAMY, AGED
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 172 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
SRI. R. NAGAMALLESWAMY
S/O RANGASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. POURA KARMIKARA COLONY,
GUNDLUPETE TOWN,
CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT.
ATTENDER,
STATE OF BANK OF INDIA,
GUNDLUPETE TOWN,
CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ANIL SHEKAR K.S, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SMT. GAYATHRI D
D/O.DORESWAMY,
W/O. R.NAGAMALLESWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
2.
KUMARI. GUNAVATHI.N,
D/O. R. NAGAMALLESWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS,
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.180,
RAYANAKERE, MANADAVADI ROAD,
RAYANAKERE,
Digitally
signed by
SUVARNA T
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
MYSORE CITY, DISTRICT.
…RESPONDENTS
(R1 IS SERVED; R2 IS MINOR)
THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY
COURTS ACT., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.04.2024
PASSED IN CRL. MISC.399/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE III
ADDITIONAL PRL. FAMILY JUDGE, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125 OF Cr.P.C. FOR
MAINTENANCE.
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
The present RPFC is filed with a delay of 715 days. In support of the said application, it is stated that the petition is filed challenging the order dated 16.04.2024 passed in C.Misc.No.399/2023 before the III Addl. Principal Family Judge, Mysuru. It is further stated that due to financial constraints, he was unable to pay the maintenance amount, and the Hon'ble Court issued an FLW. He stopped going to work, was consequently removed from his job, and, as a result, could not contact his advocate to know the status of the case. He was
HC-KAR
also in ill health, after that only he met the advocate in the month of June and came to know that C.Misc.399/2023 had been ordered. Hence, the delay of 715 days in filing the petition may be condoned.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Family Court, without considering all these aspects, has granted maintenance. Hence, the delay may be condoned for the reasons stated and the matter may be heard on merits.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and perused the reasons that are stated in the IA.
4. The petition is filed with a delay of 715 days, almost 2 years. The affidavit itself discloses that the petitioner is aware of the order and has come before this Court with a delay of 715 days. The reasons stated by the petitioner, as extracted in the preceding paragraph, cannot be termed cogent grounds to condone the delay. When a party comes to the Court with an inordinate delay, they have to state the reasons for the delay. The affidavit is bereft of reasons. Hence, this Court does not
HC-KAR
find any reasons to condone the delay. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following:
ORDER
i. Accordingly, IA No.1/2026 filed by the petitioner to condone the delay of 715 days in filing the petition is dismissed. Consequently, the RPFC is dismissed.
ii. All Pending IAs in this petition shall stand closed.
SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE
BH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22 AK