Likitha P B vs Yogananda D V Advocate - Komala K S — 125/2025
Case under Protection of Women from Domistic Voilence Act Section 29. Status: JUDGMENTS. Next hearing: 26th March 2026.
CRL.A - CRIMINAL APPEAL
CNR: KAKD010014422025
Next Hearing
26th March 2026
e-Filing Number
11-11-2025
Filing Number
124/2025
Filing Date
11-11-2025
Registration No
125/2025
Registration Date
12-11-2025
Court
PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MADIKERI
Judge
997-I ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE MADIKERI.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Likitha P B
Adv. Jayachandra M S
Respondent(s)
Yogananda D V Advocate - Komala K S
Hearing History
Judge: 997-I ADDL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE MADIKERI.
JUDGMENTS
ARGUMENTS Criminal
ARGUMENTS Criminal
OBJECTION Criminal
OBJECTION Criminal
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | JUDGMENTS |
| 06-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS Criminal |
| 25-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS Criminal |
| 20-02-2026 | OBJECTION Criminal |
| 05-02-2026 | OBJECTION Criminal |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Criminal Appeal No. 125/2025 from the 1st Additional District and Sessions Court, Madikeri-Kodagu (in Kannada). The appellate court allowed the appeal and increased the monthly maintenance amount from ₹3,000 to ₹20,000, affirming the prior decision of the Karnataka High Court. However, the court noted that the appellant failed to file the appeal within the required time period (2 years, 8 months, and 28 days had elapsed since the order dated 28-04-2024), though it admitted the appeal on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Criminal Appeal No. 125/2025 from the 1st Additional District and Sessions Court, Madikeri-Kodagu (in Kannada). The appellate court allowed the appeal and increased the monthly maintenance amount from ₹3,000 to ₹20,000, affirming the prior decision of the Karnataka High Court. However, the court noted that the appellant failed to file the appeal within the required time period (2 years, 8 months, and 28 days had elapsed since the order dated 28-04-2024), though it admitted the appeal on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts