KASHIBAI vs SOMAPPA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 16 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRUNGESH M
MISC. FIRST APPEAL NO.202241 OF 2024 (FC)
BETWEEN:
SMT. KASHIBAI W/O SOMAPPA HARIJAN
@ HOSAMANI, AGE: 30 YEARS,
OCC: WORKING AT SCHOOL,
R/O C/O SMT. NIJABAI SHEKAPPA
KESAPUR, H.NO.07, BLOCK NO.79,
ND
KSRP, 2 CROSS, ARAKERI,
POLICE QUARTERES,
TALUK AND DIST: VIJAYAPURA-586104.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI DANAPPA P. PANIBHATE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI SOMAPPA S/O MARALAPPA HARIJAN
@ HOSAMANI, AGE: 38 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O C/O SIDRAMAVVA
MARALAPPA HARIJAN, AMBEDKAR GALLI,
POST BARTUR, TALUK: MUDDEBIHAL,
DIST: VIJAYAPURA-586212.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANGOLI NAGANNA, ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 19 (1) OF FAMILY COURT ACT,
PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT AND
DECRE DATED 11.09.2023 IN M.C NO.115/2022 BY THE LEARNED
Digitally signed by
BASALINGAPPA S D
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT VIJAYAPURA IN GRANTING DECREE
OF DIVORCE AGAINST THE APPELLANT, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUTIY.
THIS MFA HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON
29.07.2026 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT,
THIS DAY, THIS COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRUNGESH M
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRUNGESH M)
The present appeal is filed by the appellant, namely
Smt. Kashibai wife of Somappa Harijan, questioning the
th
correctness and legality of the judgment dated 11
September, 2023 passed by the Principal Judge, Family
Court, Vijayapura, in M.C. No.115 of 2022.
2. The present appellant, Smt. Kashibai, was the
respondent in M.C. No.115 of 2022, whereas the present
respondent-Somappa, was the petitioner before the
learned Family Court, Vijayapura. For the sake of
convenience and clarity, the appellant and the respondent
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
are referred to as the wife and the husband respectively,
throughout this judgment.
3. The husband filed the said petition under
Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1955, against his wife, seeking dissolution of their
marriage by a decree of divorce. Their marriage was
st
solemnized on 21 May, 2010 in front of the husband’s
house situated at Bantanal Village, Muddebihal Taluk,
Vijayapura District.
4. The brief facts leading to this appeal are as
follows:
(i) The husband contended before the Family Court
that, after their marriage, he and the wife led a happy
marital life for about one year and were blessed with two
children, a daughter and a son. He further contended that
the wife had poor eyesight and that her father was
working as a constable in the Karnataka State Reserve
Police (KSRP) at Belagavi. According to the husband, after
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
the birth of their two children, the wife started quarrelling
with him over trivial matters and subjected him to cruelty.
(ii) The husband further contended that the wife
had lodged complaints against him before the Inspector
General of Police, Belagavi, and the Superintendent of
Police, Vijayapura. He also stated that the wife was well
educated, belonged to an economically well-off family, and
was accustomed to city life. According to him, wife left his
company without his knowledge and started residing at
her parental home.
(iii) It was further contended by the husband that
the wife had filed a maintenance petition against him in
Criminal Miscellaneous No.68 of 2014 before the Family
Court, Belagavi, which was partly allowed by granting
maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month. Thereafter, the wife
filed a petition seeking enhancement of maintenance,
which was numbered as Criminal Miscellaneous No.64 of
2014. The said petition was also partly allowed, and the
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
monthly maintenance was enhanced from Rs.5,000/- to
Rs.11,000/-.
(iv) The husband further contended that the wife had
filed a partition suit in O.S. No.194 of 2018 before the
Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Muddebihal. He also alleged
that wife had lodged a criminal complaint against him and
his family members for the alleged offence punishable
under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, which was
pending before the Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and
CJM, Muddebihal.
(v) The husband further contended that he was fed
up with the aggressive conduct and behaviour of the wife
and that it had become difficult for him to lead a marital
life with her. The husband also alleged that the wife had
left his company after taking away Rs.5,00,000/- from his
house. In addition, he stated that she had initiated
proceedings under Section 128 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure for recovery of the enhanced maintenance
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
amount. On these grounds, the husband claimed that he
was constrained to seek dissolution of the marriage by a
decree of divorce. Accordingly, he prayed that the petition
be allowed.
5. After presentation, the petition was registered,
and notice was duly served on the wife. She entered
appearance through her advocate, Sri S.K.Gabbur, but did
not file her statement of objections.
6. Thereafter, the learned Family Court afforded
an opportunity to the husband to adduce evidence. The
husband, Somappa, examined himself as PW-1 and got
marked 14 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-14. On the other
hand, the wife did not cross-examine PW-1. Since the wife
had not filed any statement of objections, her evidence
was taken as nil.
7. Upon completion of the evidence, the learned
Family Court heard the arguments of Smt. S.B.Kamble,
learned counsel for the husband, and proceeded to pass
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
th
the impugned judgment dated 11 September, 2023. By
the said judgment, the learned Family Court allowed the
petition filed by the husband and dissolved the marriage
st
dated 21 May, 2010, solemnized between the husband
and the wife by granting a decree of divorce.
8. Aggrieved by the judgment dissolving the
marriage, the wife has preferred this appeal on the
following grounds:
(i) The judgment under appeal is illegal, arbitrary
and erroneous, as it is contrary to the materials and
evidence on record. Hence, the same is liable to be set
aside.
(ii) The learned Family Court failed to appreciate
that the wife, despite having endured humiliation and
physical torture at the hands of her husband and in-laws
from the date of her marriage, did not lodge any complaint
against them until she was subjected to aggravated
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
physical assault and cruelty in connection with the demand
for dowry. It was only when her husband allegedly burnt
her hand with an iron rod that she was constrained to
lodge a complaint, resulting in the registration of Crime
No.31 of 2014 under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal
Code against the husband and his family members.
Therefore, the filing of the said complaint, under the
circumstances, could not be treated as an act of
harassment by the wife against her husband so as to grant
a decree of divorce in favour of the husband.
(iii) The wife further contended that, owing to the
grave nature of the alleged physical assault, humiliation
and harassment in connection with the demand for dowry,
she was compelled to leave the matrimonial home and
take shelter in her parental house to protect herself from
further physical assault. In such circumstances, the
husband cannot be permitted to obtain a decree of divorce
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
at the expense of the wife and her minor children, thereby
compelling them to lead a life of hardship and misery.
(iv) Amongst other grounds urged in the appeal, the
wife has prayed that the judgment passed by the learned
Family Court be set aside.
9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel
appearing for the wife and the husband. The records of the
Family Court have been secured and carefully perused.
10. The learned counsel for the wife has reiterated
the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal. Per
contra, the learned counsel for the husband has sought to
justify the judgment passed by the learned Family Court.
11. We have given our anxious consideration to the
rival contentions and carefully perused the entire record.
12. As observed above, the wife, who was the
respondent before the Family Court, entered appearance
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
through her advocate, Sri S.K.Gabbur. However, for the
reasons best known to her, she did not file her statement
of objections before the learned Family Court. Further, in
the memorandum of appeal, the wife has not offered any
explanation for her failure to file a statement of objections
before the Family Court.
13. Nevertheless, this Court is conscious that, in
proceedings of this nature, undue importance should not
be attached to technicalities. On the other hand, the Court
must endeavour to do complete justice by affording the
parties a fair opportunity to place their respective cases
and materials before it. Therefore, this Court does not
attach undue importance to the fact that the wife did not
file her statement of objections before the learned Family
Court.
14. The record further discloses that the wife has
filed I.A. No.2 of 2026 under Order XLI Rule 27 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking permission to
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
adduce additional evidence and produce six documents.
This Court has carefully perused the documents sought to
be produced by the wife.
15. The first document is a certified copy of the
order sheet maintained in C.C. No.4187 of 2017 (Private
Complaint No.13 of 2016), pending on the file of the
Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Muddebihal. The said
document discloses that the wife instituted the private
complaint arraying her husband, Somappa, as accused
No.1 and certain other persons as the remaining accused.
In the said complaint, she alleged that her husband-
Somappa had contracted a second marriage with one
Sunita, who was arrayed as accused No.2 in the said
private complaint.
16. The said document further discloses that the
th
complaint was presented on 4 April, 2016. After
recording the sworn statement of the wife, the learned
Magistrate took cognizance of the offences punishable
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
under Section 494 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code. The order sheet maintained in private complaint
also indicates that accused No.1 therein, namely the
th
husband, appeared before the learned Magistrate on 13
June, 2016, filed a bail application and was enlarged on
bail.
17. The wife has also produced other documents,
including the sworn statements of various persons
recorded in the said private complaint.
18. Significantly, the sixth document is a certificate
issued by the Koodalasangama Abhivrudhi Mandali. The
said certificate discloses that the husband-Somappa,
th
contracted marriage with one Sunita on 27 November,
2015 in a mass marriage ceremony organised by the said
Mandali. Thus, the certificate, prima facie, supports the
wife's contention that the husband contracted a second
th
marriage with Sunita on 27 November, 2015. It is
pertinent to note that the husband instituted the petition
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
for dissolution of marriage before the Family Court,
th
Vijayapura, on 8 April, 2022.
19. Therefore, it becomes evident that the husband
contracted a second marriage with Smt. Sunita almost
seven years before the institution of the petition for
divorce. Further, the husband had not disclosed this fact
before the learned Family Court.
20. The additional documents sought to be
produced by the wife prima facie create an impression that
the husband-Somappa had not approached the learned
Family Court with clean hands. Besides, these documents
also give rise to an inference that the husband had
suppressed material facts from the notice of the learned
Family Court and obtained a decree of divorce without
disclosing such facts.
21. In the above factual circumstances, this Court is
of the considered opinion that an opportunity ought to be
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
afforded to the wife to substantiate her allegations,
without attaching undue importance to the procedural
technicalities.
22. This Court has referred to procedural
technicalities for the following reasons.
23. As observed above, although the wife entered
appearance before the learned Family Court through her
advocate, she did not file her statement of objections.
However, if undue importance is attached to such
procedural aspects, the husband, who appears prima facie
to have suppressed material facts before the learned
Family Court, would continue to enjoy the benefit of the
decree of divorce without the wife having had an effective
opportunity to contest his claim on merits.
24. Therefore, this Court is of the considered
opinion that the decree of divorce granted by the learned
Family Court deserves to be set aside and the matter be
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
remitted to the learned Family Court for fresh
consideration, with a direction to afford the wife an
opportunity to file her statement of objections, cross-
examine the husband and adduce evidence in support of
her defence.
25. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER
allowed
i) The appeal is .
th
ii) The judgment and decree dated 11
September, 2023 passed by the Principal
Judge, Family Court, Vijayapura, in M.C.
No.115 of 2022, dissolving the marriage
between the parties, are hereby set aside.
iii) The matter is remitted to the learned
Family Court, Vijayapura, for fresh
consideration in accordance with law.
- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11437-DB
MFA No. 202241 of 2024
CNR: KAHC030050952024
iv) The wife shall be afforded an opportunity to
file her statement of objections, cross-
examine the husband and adduce evidence
in support of her defence.
v) The learned Family Court shall dispose of
the matter afresh, after affording both
parties a reasonable opportunity of being
heard, without being influenced by any
observations made by this Court on the
merits of the allegations.
vi) The parties are directed to appear before
the learned Family Court on 13.11.2026
without waiting for any fresh summons or
notice from the learned Family Court,
Vijayapura.
vii) All contentions of the parties are kept open.
Sd/-
(R.DEVDAS)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(BRUNGESH M)
JUDGE
BL