IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA WRIT PETITION NO.36004 OF 2025 (GM-FC)

BETWEEN:

SMT. REVATHI K., D/O. SRI KANNAPPAN AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO. 96/84, 2ND FLOOR, COLLECTORATE COLONY, AMINJIKARAI, CHENNAI, Digitally signed by AASEEFA 4TH CROSS STREET EXTENSION, PARVEEN TAMILNADU-600029.

Location: HIGH COURT OF …PETITIONER KARNATAKA (BY SRI. EKAMBE VENKANNA G., ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI. JATHIN SHETTY A., S/O LATESRI ANAND B. SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NO. 201, "SUNFLOWER PAVNI RESIDENCY", PUTTENAHALLI, YELAHANKA, BANGALORE-560064.

…RESPONDENT (NOTICE TO RESPONDENT DISPENSED WITH, V/O. DATED 12/02/2026)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.09.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED 6TH ADDL. FAMILY COURT BANGALORE ON IA NO. 3 IN MC NO.2293/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri.Ekambe Venkanna.G learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. After giving anxious consideration to the submission that is made by learned counsel for the petitioner and upon going through the relevant material that is brought on record, this Court is of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of without service of notice to respondent. Hence, service of notice to respondent is dispensed with.

3. Seeking the Court to quash the order that is rendered by the Court of VI Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru on I.A.No.III in M.C.No.2293/2023 dated 22.09.2025, this writ petition is filed.

4. Respondent/husband filed a petition seeking dissolution of marriage through a decree of divorce. Petitioner/wife filed I.A.No.III under Order VII Rule 11 CPC seeking the Court to reject that petition. The said interlocutory application was dismissed and aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner/wife submits that petitioner was residing at Chennai and respondent was residing at Bengaluru when they came into contact with each other. They both fell in love and ultimately got married at Chennai. The marriage was registered at Chennai. Subsequently, they again married as per customs and traditions and the said marriage was solemnized at Tirupathi. Thereafter, petitioner/wife joined respondent/ husband at Bengaluru and started residing at Bengaluru. They begot a child. Later differences arose between them and finally respondent dropped petitioner at her parents house at Chennai. Thus, petitioner/wife started residing at Chennai since 2023. Therefore, respondent has to file any petition seeking decree of divorce at the jurisdictional Court at Chennai but not at Bengaluru. However, respondent/husband filed a petition at Bengaluru seeking decree of divorce. Petitioner/wife therefore filed a petition i.e., I.A.No.III seeking the Court to reject the petition. But her request was not honoured. Learned counsel thereby seeks to allow the writ petition and quash the impugned order.

6. Respondent/husband filed a petition invoking Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking decree of divorce. Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 deals with the jurisdiction and the place where every petition under the said Act has to be presented. The said provision reads as follows:

19. Court to which petition shall be presented.- Every petition under this Act shall be presented to the District Court within the local limits of whose ordinary original civil jurisdiction.-

(i) the marriage was solemnized; or (ii) the respondent, at the time of the presentation of the petition, resides; or (iii) the parties to the marriage last resided together; or (iii-a) in case the wife is the petitioner, where she is residing on the date of presentation of the petition, or;

(iv) the petitioner is residing at th