SMT BHUVANESHWARI R vs SRI NAREDNRA D DEVANGA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
NC: 2026:KHC:32391
WP No. 13050 of 2026
HC-KAR
R
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF JUNE, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 13050 OF 2026 (GM-FC)
BETWEEN:
SMT BHUVANESHWARI R
D/O SRI A. RENUKA PRASAD
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
R/O NO.14, CHOWDAPPA ROAD,
SHANTHINAGAR,
BENGALURU 560 027.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SAILESH PUVVALA AND
SMT. POOJA M KOORSE., ADVOCATES)
AND:
SRI NAREDNRA D DEVANGA
S/O. B.C.DEVARAJU
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
TH
R/O NO.516, 15 MAIN,
ST RD
1 BLOCK, 3 STAGE,
WEST OF CHORD ROAD,
MANJUNATHNAGAR,
RAJAJINAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 010.
…RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
Digitally signed
by
PADMASHREE
SHEKHAR DESAI
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DTD: 30.01.2026 AT ANX-A IN G AND WC
NO.178/2025 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY
COURT BENGALURU AND TO QUASH THE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS IN G AND WC NO. 178/2025 AND ETC.
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:32391
WP No. 13050 of 2026
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
ORAL ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner is present. In spite of
service of notice, respondent-father did not turn up.
2. This writ petition is filed against the order dated
30.01.2026 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court,
Bengaluru, in G & WC No.178 of 2025.
3. The petitioner-mother, in this petition, has stated that
marriage between herself and her husband was dissolved by a
decree of divorce in M.C. No.1010 of 2023 as per the terms of
memorandum of settlement entered between them before
Karnataka Mediation Centre, Bengaluru, on 24.09.2024. She
relied upon clause 3 of terms of the said document, in which
respondent-father specifically gave up his visitation rights. The
respondent-father also agreed petitioner as permanent
custodian and guardian of the minor child, but he filed G & WC
No.178 of 2025 without any locus-standi against the terms of
the settlement agreed between both of them. As such, the
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:32391
WP No. 13050 of 2026
HC-KAR
filing of G & WC itself is void ab-initio and it should have been
dismissed as not maintainable by the Family Court at the
threshold. It is further stated by petitioner-mother that, from
the birth of the minor child till date, respondent-father has not
made any effort to visit, care for or assume any parental
responsibilities including financial support or emotional
guidance.
4. It is stated by the petitioner-mother that marriage
between petitioner and respondent was legally dissolved in MC
No.1010 of 2023 on 26.09.2024 itself. The respondent-father
renounced all the visitation rights, but he deliberately
misrepresented the facts before the Family Court and obtained
orders for visitation of minor child in G & WC No.178 of 2025
dated 30.01.2026. It is further stated that criminal complaint
filed against respondent-father in CC No.18022 of 2023 under
Sections 307, 498A, 506, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC was
withdrawn in view of the settlement. It is also stated that
respondent-father is already remarried, whereas the minor
child is receiving excellent care and quality of education in a
safe and nurturing environment free from exposure to any cruel
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:32391
WP No. 13050 of 2026
HC-KAR
or adverse influences. He was enrolled in a reputed school
receiving proper education, guidance and upbringing that
fosters good values and culture. Therefore, the petitioner-
mother requested this Court to set aside the order of the
Family Court dated 30.01.2026.
5. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the
petitioner.
6. Admittedly, the marriage between petitioner-mother
and respondent-father was dissolved legally in MC No.1010 of
2023 on 26.09.2024 itself. At the time of dissolution of
marriage, the matter was referred to Mediation. After several
negotiations, both parties entered into the terms of settlement,
rd
wherein the relevant point, i.e. the 3 point, reads as follows:
3. The petitioner and the respondent state
that they have one son by name Samarth N. born
on 26.07.2021, who is presently under the care
and custody of the respondent-mother and the
respondent-mother shall continue to be the
permanent custodian and guardian of the minor
child for which the petitioner-father has no
objection. The petitioner-father gives up his
visitation rights.
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:32391
WP No. 13050 of 2026
HC-KAR
7. Petitioner-mother has clearly stated that, the
respondent-father has already remarried and he never shown
any interest in upbringing the child. But the Family Court,
without considering all those aspects, granted visitation rights
to the respondent-father and also directed him to pay 50%
educational expenses. Both the parties settled the matter
before Mediation and father of the child voluntarily and
cautiously given up his rights for visitation and, is not permitted
to again commence litigation after one year. When he is not
ready to take-up the responsibility of the child financially and
emotionally, he can’t interfere in the life of the child for
visitation again. When he avoids duty, he can’t get rights. It is
stated by the petitioner-mother that she never sought for
maintenance, but only asked the Family Court to declare her as
the permanent custodian for the welfare of the minor child.
Therefore, this Court finds that the order of the Family Court is
not on proper appreciation of facts and is liable to be set aside.
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:32391
WP No. 13050 of 2026
HC-KAR
8. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The order
dated 30.01.2026 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court,
Bengaluru, in G & WC No.178 of 2025, is hereby set aside.
Sd/-
(P SREE SUDHA)
JUDGE
CS
CT:NR
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 8