- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
SMT REVATHI @ GAYATHRI v. SRI RAVI NANDA GOPI
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18483-DB MFA No. 4721 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4721 OF 2018 (MC)
BETWEEN:
SMT. REVATHI @ GAYATHRI W/O RAVINDRA GOPI
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
ADVOCATE
R/AT OPP. VINAYAKA HALL,
D K HALLI ROAD, BEML NAGAR
K.G.F - 563 122
…APPELLANT
[BY SRI. S BALAKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE (ABSENT)]
AND:
SRI. RAVI NANDA GOPI
S/O DASARATHANAIDU,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/AT JAYALAKSHMI ILLAM,
BEHIND POLICE LINE QUARTERS,
ANDERSONPET, K.G.F - 563 122 …RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. AKERSH B.R., ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. VEENAKUMARI M., ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 28(1) OF HINDU
MARRIAGE ACT, 1955, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 03.02.2018, PASSED IN M.C.NO.104/2010 ON THE FILE OF
THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., K.G.F.,
ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1)(ia) & SECTION 13(1)(ib) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT 1955.
- 2 -
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI) This appeal has been called out twice. No one appears for the appellant. The appeal was filed on 08.06.2018. The office objections were complied with on behalf of the appellant only on 13.03.2019. Thereafter emergent notice was directed to be issued by the Court. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned on 13.03.2020 in the presence of counsel for both the parties. By an order dated 17.03.2020, the matter was referred to Bangalore Mediation Centre to explore the possibility of a settlement. However, neither the litigants nor the counsels approached the mediation centre for mediation.
2. On 16.10.2025, the learned counsel for the appellant sought an adjournment to enable him to seek instructions in the matter. Notice was also issued to the respondent to engage another counsel. On 17.11.2025, this Court directed that trial Court records be secured and noting
- 3 -
the contention of the counsel for the parties that the parties are residing separately since the year 2000, the matter be referred for mediation, the matter was referred for mediation before the Mediation Centre. The report of the mediation centre was received stating that the matter is not settled. It appears that the appellant is not keen to press this appeal. The appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. This order has been passed in the presence of the learned counsel for the respondent.
Sd/-
(JAYANT BANERJI)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(RAJESH RAI K)
JUDGE
KG
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 6
Alert