Karnataka High Court
WP/38024/2015 of SRI B NATARAJU Vs SMT B KALPANA on 31 December 2015
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2015 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY W.P.NO. 38024/2015(GM-FC) BETWEEN: SRI. B. Nataraju, S/o late G N Basappa, 60 years R/o No. 708, Basavanagudi Road, Venkatappa Galli, Division No 19, Chikballapur Town
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31[ST]DAY OF DECEMBER 7015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY|
#W.P.NO. 38024/2015(GMFC)
BETWEEN:
SRI. B. Nataraju, ©S/o late G N Basappa, 60 years.R/o No. 708, Basavanagudi Road,|Venkatappa Galli, Division No 19, Chikballapur Town & District,Chikballapur - 562101... PETITIONER|
(By Snri. Jai Prakash Ready M, Advocate)
AND"
Smt B Kalpana, W/o B Nataraju,D/o late Basavarajappa, 49 years,R/o Amma Bnavani Nilaya,Division No. 20,|Benind VakkKaligara Kalyana MantapaOuter Ring Road, Doddanekundi,Chikballapur Town & District,Chikballapur —- 562101.
... RESPONDENT
(By Snri. KALYAN R, Advocate)
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 22/7 ofthe Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated20.12.2014 on I.A.No.3 filed u/s 24 of Hindu Marriage Act in M.C.No.38/2011 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge &CJM at Chikbaliapur vide Annexure-E and dismiss the I.A.No.3filed u/s 24 of Hindu Marriage Act vide Annexure-C etc.
This writ petition coming on for preliminary hearing thisday, tne Court made the following:-|
ORDER
Page 1 of 2
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he)would insist that there has been compliance with the order of the Court below. If it is so, the question of initiation of anyexecution proceedings would not arise and if any proceedings ©are pending before the Court below, the Court below shouldexamine whether there is compliance of the order passed bythis Court. If it is so, the execution petition should be closedwithout any furtner orders. |
2. The interim order passed by this Court snail betreated as a final order as far as this petition is concerned and subject to the final determination of the maintenance that therespondent snail be entitled to be determined before theFamily Court in due course.
3. The petition stands disposed of.
4. In so far as the complaint of the respondent tnat theson of the petitioner and the respondent is unwell and requiresconstant medical attention is concerned, the petitioner isready to take the custody and care of his son. It is for theparties to work out their remedy in due course before thecourt below.
SD/-
JUDGE
Msu
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…