Mr V Manoharlal Thekri vs Smt Latha Karunan
2021 Latest Caselaw 6393 Kant

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                             BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

                    R.F.A.No.1553 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

Mr. V. Manoharlal Thekri
Aged about 71 years
S/o. late Vensimal Thekri
Represented by Power of Attorney Holder

Mr. Rajkumar M. Jagthianai
Son of Mohan N. Jagthianai
Aged about 53 years,

Both residing at
No.239/240, 8th Main Road,
Shanthinikethan Layout,
Arekere, Bengaluru - 560 076.
                                              ...Appellant
(By Sri. Shreyas B.S.,   Advocate)

AND:

1.     Smt. Latha Karunan,
       Aged about 69 years,
       W/o. Late Thumboli Karunan
       No.241-B/242-B, 8th Main Road,
       Shant hinikethan Layout, Arekere,
       Bengaluru - 560 076.

2.     The Joint Commissioner,
       Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike,
       Bommanahalli,
       Bangalore - 560 068.
                                                 R.F.A.No.1553/2018

                                   2




3.    The Assistant Executive Engineer,
      Arekere Sub-Division, BBMP,
      Bommnahalli, Bengaluru - 560 068.

                                                ...Respondents
(By Sri. Poonacha, C.M.,
Advocate for Caveator/Respondent No.1)

                               ****
       This R.F.A. is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, praying to call for the records in
O.S.No.6589/2007 on the file of the learned LII Additional City
Civil and Sessions Judge at Bangalore; set aside the impugned
judgment and decree dated 14-06-2018 in O.S.No.6589/2007 by
the learned LII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bangalore City (CCH_53); and to grant such other reliefs as this
Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case and
also grant costs of the entire proceedings in the interest of
justice and equity.

     This R.F.A. coming on for Orders, through Physical
Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing, this day, the Court made
the following:

                             ORDER

Called again.

Learned counsel for the appellant is physically present and

the learned counsel for the caveator/respondent No.1 is

appearing through video conference.

In view of the fact that the appellant has engaged another

counsel who has already filed his vakalath, the learned counsel R.F.A.No.1553/2018

Sri.T.S. Sathish is permitted to retire from appearing for the

appellant as prayed in the memo dated 29-09-2021.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that since a

minor typographical error has crept in the affidavit filed by the

appellant seeking permission to withdraw the appeal, in

mentioning the Original Suit number, he would be, in addition to

the same, also filing a memo, not pressing the appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo stating

that he does not want to press the appeal.

The caveator/first respondent's counsel submits his no

objection for the same.

In view of the affidavit accompanied by the memo filed

today and also the supporting submission, the appeal stands

dismissed as not pressed.

In view of disposal of the main appeal, the pending

I.A.No.1/2018 does not survive for consideration.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BMV*