IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT KALABURAGI DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISC. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200082 OF 2017 (FC)

BETWEEN:

SUDHA W/O RAJSAKAR, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE (PRINCIPAL OF GYNAN JYOTI EDUCATION SOCIETY)

BIDAR RAMPURI, BANK COLONY, NEAR HANUMAN TEMPLE, BIDAR, R/O: GUMMA COLONY, SANGAMESHWAR NIVAS, BIDAR.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. HANAMANTHRAYA SINDOL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

RAJSAKAR S/O BAKKAPPA NELLI, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE, R/O: BIDAR (DIST: STATISTICAL OFFICE)

…RESPONDENT (BY SMT. NEEVA M.CHIMKOD, ADVOCATE - ABSENT)

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 28 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.12.2016 PASSED IN M.C.NO.10 OF 2009 BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, AT BIDAR AND ETC.

THIS MFA HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 16.04.2026, THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ and HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA CAV JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)

1. The appellant/wife who was respondent in M.C.No.10/2009 is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

i. Call for the lower court records.

ii. Allow the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment and decree dated: 05.12.2016 passed in M.C.No.10 of 2009 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM at Bidar.

iii. Cost of the proceedings may kindly be decreed.

iv. Any other relief which is legally and equitably entitled by the appellant may also be awarded in favour of the appellant in the interest of justice.

2. The respondent–husband instituted proceedings in M.C. No.10/2009 seeking dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce.

3. The facts, in brief, are that the marriage between the appellant–wife and the respondent–husband was solemnised on 16.06.2002 at Talmadgi Village, Humnabad Taluk, in accordance with the customs and rituals prevailing in their community. It is not in dispute that the parties cohabited after marriage and were blessed with two sons.

4. According to the husband, the marital relationship was cordial for about three years, thereafter disputes arose between the parties. It is his case that the wife left the matrimonial home and started residing with her parents, taking along the custody of the children. Despite repeated requests made by him, she did not resume cohabitation. The husband, who was in service and posted at different places, contends that the wife consistently refused to join him.

5. It is further stated that the husband had earlier filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking restitution of conjugal rights, whereas the wife had initiated proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for maintenance. The wife is stated to be employed as a Principal in a school and residing at her parental home.

6. The husband further alleged that the wife made false and defamatory accusations against him, including allegations of an illicit relationship with another woman and that he was suffering from HIV/AIDS. It is also alleged that the wife and her father abused him and refused to send her back to the matrimonial home. On these grounds, the husband sought dissolution of marriage.

7. The appellant–wife entered appearance and filed her statement of objections denying the allegations. While admitting the marriage and birth of two children, she contended that it was the husband who subjected her to ill-treatment and developed an illicit relationship with another woman, thereby compelling her to leave the matrimonial home and reside with her parents.

8. She further contended that the husband neither cared for her nor for the children and failed to maintain them, which necessitated initiation of proceedings under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. The petition filed by the husband for restitution of conjugal rights in M.C. No.7/2007, it is stated, ca