- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:44038 RPFC No. 222 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010527892025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 222 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT VINUTHA H. M., W/O MALLIKARJUNAIAH T C M, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT MUDAHADADI VILLAGE, DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT-577001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N. RAMAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M. R. HIREMATHAD,ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. MALLIKARJUNAIAH T. C. M., S/O MANJUNATHAIAH T. C. M, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC GOVERNMENT RUN ARDISONS FACTORY,Digitally signed R/AT THOWDUR VILLAGE AND POST,by AASEEFA PARVEEN HARAPANAHALLI TALUK, Location: HIGH VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT-591222. COURT OF KARNATAKA ASLO R/AT ARDINANCE ESTATE, NEW TYPE-3, 23/7, AMBARNATHA, THANE DISTRICT MAHARASTRA STATE-421592 ADDITIONAL ADDRESS: ARDINANCE FACTORY, I. D. NO. 5316, MILL RATE/ A. M. SECTION, AMBARNATHA, THANE DISTRICT, MAHARASTRA STATE-421502. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE) - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:44038 RPFC No. 222 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010527892025 THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.04.2024 PASSED IN CRI. MISC NO.415/2022 ON THE FILE OF JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DAVANAGERE., PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125 OF CR.P.C., FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL ORDER ON I.A.No.1/2025 This is a petition filed seeking the Court to condone the delay of 386 days in filing the revision petition. 2. Heard Sri.Ramakrishna who represents Sri.M.R.Hiremathad learned counsel on record for the petitioner as well as Ms.Bhavana who represents Sri.R.Shashidhara learned counsel on record for the respondent. The only submission that is made by learned counsel who represents the petitioner is that the petitioner could not file revision petition within time due to the reasons mentioned at para 3 of the affidavit given by him. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:44038 RPFC No. 222 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010527892025 3. Para 3 of the affidavit given by the petitioner in support of her application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is as under: " I further state that, I am suffering a prolonged medical condition due to said unavoidable circumstances beyong my control and financial hardship which prevented me from taking timely steps."

4. When this Court questioned learned counsel who represents the petitioner to state about the kind of illness with which the petitioner was suffering, learned counsel submitted that he do not know anything about that illness. Not even a single document is filed by the petitioner to establish such prolonged medical condition, as projected by her. Also there are no details of the unavoidable circumstances which were beyond her control as stated by her at para 3 of the affidavit. 5. Parties to the proceedings cannot expect that the applications filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act will all be dealt with liberally and delay of any amount will - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:44038 RPFC No. 222 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010527892025 be condoned. Law mandates that any relief sought for should have convincing reasons. In the case on hand, the delay is more than a year. Such being the case, petitioner should have been diligent in pursuing the matter and should have produced sufficient proof in support of her contentions and the grounds due to which she could not file revision petition within time. Also, as earlier indicated, the counsel who represents the petitioner himself stated that he do not know with what ailment the petitioner was suffering and the reasons due to which she could not file the revision petition within time. Having considered all these factors, this Court is of the view that there are no grounds to condone the delay. Resultantly, the following: ORDER

The application is dismissed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:44038 RPFC No. 222 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010527892025 Consequently, the proceedings in the revision petition are closed. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE DS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:44038 RPFC No. 222 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010527892025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 222 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT VINUTHA H. M., W/O MALLIKARJUNAIAH T C M, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT MUDAHADADI VILLAGE, DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT-577001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N. RAMAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M. R. HIREMATHAD,ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. MALLIKARJUNAIAH T. C. M., S/O MANJUNATHAIAH T. C. M, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC GOVERNMENT RUN ARDISONS FACTORY,Digitally signed R/AT THOWDUR VILLAGE AND POST,by AASEEFA PARVEEN HARAPANAHALLI TALUK, Location: HIGH VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT-591222. COURT OF KARNATAKA ASLO R/AT ARDINANCE ESTATE, NEW TYPE-3, 23/7, AMBARNATHA, THANE DISTRICT MAHARASTRA STATE-421592 ADDITIONAL ADDRESS: ARDINANCE FACTORY, I. D. NO. 5316, MILL RATE/ A. M. SECTION, AMBARNATHA, THANE DISTRICT, MAHARASTRA STATE-421502. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE) - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:44038 RPFC No. 222 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010527892025 THIS RPFC FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.04.2024 PASSED IN CRI. MISC NO.415/2022 ON THE FILE OF JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DAVANAGERE., PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125 OF CR.P.C., FOR MAINTENANCE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL ORDER ON I.A.No.1/2025 This is a petition filed seeking the Court to condone the delay of 386 days in filing the revision petition. 2. Heard Sri.Ramakrishna who represents Sri.M.R.Hiremathad learned counsel on record for the petitioner as well as Ms.Bhavana who represents Sri.R.Shashidhara learned counsel on record for the respondent. The only submission that is made by learned counsel who represents the petitioner is that the petitioner could not file revision petition within time due to the reasons mentioned at para 3 of the affidavit given by him. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:44038 RPFC No. 222 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010527892025 3. Para 3 of the affidavit given by the petitioner in support of her application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is as under: " I further state that, I am suffering a prolonged medical condition due to said unavoidable circumstances beyong my control and financial hardship which prevented me from taking timely steps."

4. When this Court questioned learned counsel who represents the petitioner to state about the kind of illness with which the petitioner was suffering, learned counsel submitted that he do not know anything about that illness. Not even a single document is filed by the petitioner to establish such prolonged medical condition, as projected by her. Also there are no details of the unavoidable circumstances which were beyond her control as stated by her at para 3 of the affidavit. 5. Parties to the proceedings cannot expect that the applications filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act will all be dealt with liberally and delay of any amount will - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:44038 RPFC No. 222 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010527892025 be condoned. Law mandates that any relief sought for should have convincing reasons. In the case on hand, the delay is more than a year. Such being the case, petitioner should have been diligent in pursuing the matter and should have produced sufficient proof in support of her contentions and the grounds due to which she could not file revision petition within time. Also, as earlier indicated, the counsel who represents the petitioner himself stated that he do not know with what ailment the petitioner was suffering and the reasons due to which she could not file the revision petition within time. Having considered all these factors, this Court is of the view that there are no grounds to condone the delay. Resultantly, the following: ORDER

The application is dismissed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:44038 RPFC No. 222 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010527892025 Consequently, the proceedings in the revision petition are closed. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE DS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17