Mr. Vinoda Kumar M J vs Nil

Mr. Vinoda Kumar M J vs NIL

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Decided Apr 24, 2026

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1536410

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1536410
Court: Karnataka High Court
Judge: Jayant Banerji,Rajesh Rai K
Decided On: Apr 24, 2026
Case Number: MFA/2208/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mr. Vinoda Kumar M J

Respondent

NIL

Excerpt

.....dated 28.02.2026 passed in mc no.1345/2026 on the file of the principal judge, family court, bengaluru, dismissing the petition filed under section 13b of the hindu marriage act, 1955. this appeal, coming on for admission, this day,judgment was delivered therein as under:-3- coram: hon'ble mr. justice jayant banerji andhon'ble mr. justice rajesh rai koral judgment(per: hon'ble mr. justice jayant banerji) this appeal is filed by the petitioners / appellants against the impugned order dated 28.02.2026 by means of which, i.a. no.4 filed by the petitioners/appellants under section 14 of the hindu marriage act, 19551 seeking leave to present the petition under section 13b of the hm act within one year from the date of the marriage has been rejected.2. a perusal of the impugned order reflects that thelearned principal judge, family court has considered the decisions of this court and has observed that in the absence of rules framed by this court under the proviso to section 14(1) of the hm act, the court would not have jurisdiction to entertain the application seeking leave to institute the petition within one year from the date of the marriage. hm act -4-3. after arguing for some time, learned counsel for theappellants has in all fairness moved a memo for withdrawal of the appeal seeking liberty to file a fresh application. the memo is accepted. the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. it shall be open to the appellants to move a fresh petition, as advised, in accordance with law. (jayant banerji) (rajesh rai k) kg list no.: 1 sl no.: 1

Full Judgment

-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2208 OF 2026 (FC) BETWEEN:
1. MR. VINODA KUMAR M J

S/O JAVAREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.02, BIRESHWARANAGAR, Digitally signed by KAVYA G BENGALURU - 560 078. Location: High PERMANENT ADDRESS : MARANAHALLI VILLAGE, Court of Karnataka HALLY MYSORE HOBLI, HOLENARASIPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 210

2. MRS. SINCHANA M.S W/O VINOD KUMAR M.J, D/O SOMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, -2-

R/AT NO.02, BIRESHWARANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 078. PERMANENT ADDRESS : MARIYAGOWDANAHALLI VILLAGE, ANKANAHALLI POST, CHUNCHANAKATTE HOBLI, K.R. NAGAR TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 617 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR G M., ADVOCATE AND SMT. LAKSHMI A., ADVOCATE) AND: NIL …RESPONDENT THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 19(1) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.02.2026 PASSED IN MC NO.1345/2026 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 13B OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

-3- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI) This appeal is filed by the petitioners / appellants against the impugned order dated 28.02.2026 by means of which, I.A. No.4 filed by the petitioners/appellants under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 19551 seeking leave to present the petition under Section 13B of the HM Act within one year from the date of the marriage has been rejected.

2. A perusal of the impugned order reflects that the

learned Principal Judge, Family Court has considered the decisions of this Court and has observed that in the absence of Rules framed by this Court under the proviso to Section 14(1) of the HM Act, the Court would not have jurisdiction to entertain the application seeking leave to institute the petition within one year from the date of the marriage. HM Act -4-

3. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the

appellants has in all fairness moved a memo for withdrawal of the appeal seeking liberty to file a fresh application. The memo is accepted. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. It shall be open to the appellants to move a fresh petition, as advised, in accordance with law. (JAYANT BANERJI) (RAJESH RAI K) KG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

Same Court & Year Karnataka · 2026 Same Parties Mr. Vinoda Kumar M J vs NIL Same Judge Jayant Banerji,Rajesh Rai K