CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 12 KAR CK 0233

Smt B Usha Shivaprasad and Vidya Prasad Bellur vs Dr B.G Shivaprasad

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 7 December 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
B.V. Pinto, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal P. No. 6710 of 2011

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 383 words

B.V. Pinto

1.

This petition is filed seeking direction to transfer the case in C.Misc.No. 478/2011 pending on the file of the Family Court at Mysore to the Family Court at Bangalore.

2.

It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent is the husband of the first petitioner and the lather of the second petitioner and the he is residing in Ohio, U.S.A. and order has been passed directing the respondent to pay the petitioners US $250 each as monthly maintenance as per the order in C. Misc.No. 21/2011 by the Family Court. Mysore which has been confirmed by this Court in RPFC No. 42/2011 connected with RPFC No. 48/2011. It is the further submission of the petitioners - party-in-person that the property of the respondent is situated within the jurisdiction of Shankarapuram Police Station, Bangalore and therefore, the Family Court at Mysore has expressed the inability to execute the order of the Family Court in so far as the maintenance is concerned. It is observed by the Family Court, Mysore that the Family Court would not attach the immovable property situated outside the jurisdiction of the said Court and therefore, the request for the attachment of the property belonging to the respondent cannot be considered, in view of the fact that the property is situated outside the territory of the said Court.

3.

Heard the petitioners party-in-person.

4.

The petitioners party-in-person submit that the copy of the notice of this Court is served on Sri Rama Ravindra. N, learned Counsel for the respondent before the trial Court. The respondent is residing in U.S.A.

5.

Having regard to the urgency of the matter, I am of the view that no further notice is required to be served on the respondent and the respondent is deemed to be served.

6.

I have gone through the materials on record including the order of this Court passed in RPFC.No. 48/2011 c/w, 42/2011 dated 04.07.2011. in view of the finding of this Court that the petitioners are entitled for maintenance from the respondent, the proceedings in C.Misc.No. 478/2011 now pending before the Family Court, Mysore is transferred to the Principal Judge, Family Court at Bangalore with a direction to proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

With the above observations, the petition is allowed.