VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Karnataka High Court 2026 › High Court of Karnataka

Ravikumar M v. Smt Manasa T

DISPOSED
Court
High Court of Karnataka
Decided
19 May 2026
Bench
Suraj Govindaraj, K.Manmadha Rao
Case no.
MFA 102/2023

Follow Karnataka High CourtFollow Suraj GovindarajFollow K.Manmadha Rao

Judgment

NC:(2026:KHC:24819-DB( MFA(No.(102(of(2023( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(19 (DAY(OF(MAY,(2026(

PRESENT( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(SURAJ(GOVINDARAJ( AND(( THE(HON'BLE(DR.(JUSTICE(K.MANMADHA(RAO(

MISCELLANEOUS(FIRST(APPEAL(NO.102(OF(2023((MC)(

BETWEEN:(( ( RAVIKUMAR,M, S/O,MUNISWAMY,R,,,,

AGED,ABOUT,40,YEARS,,, NO.135,,NEAR,YELLAMMA,TEMPLE,, HEELALIGE,,CHANDAPURA,POST,,

ANEKAL,TALUK,, BENGALURU,-,560,099., …APPELLANT,

(BY,SRI.,M.J,ALVA,,ADVOCATE),

AND:( ( SMT.MANASA,T, W/O,RAVIKUMAR,M,AND, Digitallytisignedtiby D/O,THIMMARAYAPPA,, VIJAYALAKSHMI AGED,ABOUT,31,YEARS,,, B0N NO.121,,MANASA,NILAYA, Location:0HIGH HEELALIGE,MAIN,ROAD,,,COURT0OF CHANDAPURA,POST,,KARNATAKA ANEKAL,TALUK,,, BENGALURU,-,560,099., …RESPONDENT, (BY,SRI.,NAGA,REDDY,V.,ADVOCATE), , THIS, MFA, IS, FILED, U/S, 28(1), OF, HINDU, MARRIAGE, ACT,, AGAINST,THE,JUDGMENT,AND,DECREE,DATED,23.09.2022,,PASSED, IN, MC, NO.5049/2020, ON, THE, FILE, OF, THE, III, ADDITIONAL, DISTRICT,AND,SESSIONS,JUDGE,,BENGALURU,RURAL,DISTRICT,,SIT, AT, ANEKAL,, , DISMISSING, THE, PETITION, FILED, UNDER, SECTION, 13(ia)(ib),OF,THE,HINDU,MARRIAGE,ACT.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO)

¶1Appellant and respondent are present before the Court along with their counsels.

¶2Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶3Appellant and respondent have filed a Compromise petition dated 19.05.2026 under Order XXIII Rule 3 of CPC read with Section 21 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The compromise petition reads as under: The appellant and the respondent submit as follows:

¶1The appellant has filed the above appeal against the dismissal of his petition in MC No.5049/2020 dated 23.9.2022 by the trial court which is filed under Section 13 (1) (ia) and (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act. The appellant and the respondent are husband and wife respectively and their marriage had been performed on 21.3.2016 as per Hindu Customary Rites. The respondent had refused to cohabit with the appellant and since 15.10.2016

both the parties have been living separately and independently without having any relationship what-so-ever between them for the past nearly ten long years.

¶2During the pendency of the above appeal due to the intervention of their respective parents and the elders in the family, both the parties have resolved their differences and mutually agreed and conceded to dissolve their marriage. The respondent herein has agreed to have no objection to allow the petition filed by the appellant before the trial court in MC No.5049/2020 seeking dissolution of their marriage. The respondent admits that due to the long standing pendency of the proceedings they have been living separately and independently and away from each other. She also admits that there are no issues in the wedlock. Under these circumstances both the parties have filed this compromise petition conceding for dissolution of their marriage on the following terms conditions: a) The respondent has agreed to receive the sum of Rs.25 Lakhs from the appellant towards one time settlement of her permanent alimony and that she shall not have any further claim against the appellant under any circumstances in future.

(b) The appellant has paid the said agreed sum of Rs.25 Lakhs (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) to the respondent through Demand Draft No.000751 dated 29.4.2026 issued by HDFC Bank Ltd., Bengaluru towards one time settlement of her permanent alimony.

(c) The respondent admits and acknowledges the receipt of the said sum of Rs.25 Lakhs from the appellant before this Hon'ble Court towards her permanent alimony as one time settlement payment and that she shall not have any further claim against the appellant in future under any circumstances.

(d) Both the parties have exchanged their respective movables and other valuables and there is no further claim what-so-ever against each other.

(e) There is no collusion or coercion or undue influence by any of the parties for agreeing this compromise and both the parties have voluntarily and on their own volition have agreed and conceded for this compromise.

(f) The respondent concedes for allowing the petition filed by the appellant before the trial court in MC No. 5049/2020 seeking dissolution of their marriage under Section 13 (1) (ia) & (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act.

(g) Both the parties have agreed to bear their own costs throughout the proceedings. Wherefore, the appellant and the respondent pray for the following reliefs:

(i) Allow the above appeal filed by the appellant and thereby set aside the impugned judgement & decree dated 23.9.2022 passed by the learned III Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District sit at Anekal in MC No.5049/2020.

(ii) Pass a judgement & decree of divorce dissolving the marriage between the appellant and the respondent which was performed on 21.3.2016 at KNT Kalyana Mantapa, Chandapura, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Urban District as prayed in the petition filed by the appellant in MC No. 5049/2020.

¶4Compromise Petition dated 19.05.2026 is taken on record.

¶5Both the parties have agreed to the terms of the compromise petition.

¶6The appellant has paid a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- through demand draft the respondent acknowledges receipt of the same as per compromise petition.

¶7On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on going through the terms of the Compromise Petition, the following order is passed:

i) The impugned Judgment dated 23.09.2022 passed in MC No.5049/2020 on the file of the III Addl. District Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, sitting at Anekal is set aside.

ii) The marriage between the appellant and respondent solemnized on

21.03.2016 is hereby dissolved.

iii) The Miscellaneous First Appeal is disposed of in terms of the joint memo.

iv) No order as to costs.

SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

SD/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE

BNV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1

Source: High Court of Karnataka, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.