Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 656 Kant
Judgement Date : 11 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL No.8 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
Smt. Alumelamma
D/o late Chikka Thimmappa
W/o Rangaiah,
Aged about 68 years
(senior citizenship not claimed)
R/o T. Gollahalli
Bellavi Post, Tumakuru Taluk,
Tumakuru District - 572 107.
... APPELLANT
(By Sri K.R. Ramesh, Advocate)
AND:
1. Govindaraja K.V.,
S/o Venkataramanappa
Aged about 46 years.
2. Janardhana,
S/o Venkataramanappa
Aged about 39 years.
Both are r/o Keregalapalya
Kasaba Hobli, Madhugiri Taluk
Tumakuru District - 572 132.
MSA 8/2017
2
3. Radhamma
W/o Krishnappa
Aged about 65 years.
4. Krishnappa
S/o late Krishnappa
Aged about 36 years.
5. Seenappa
S/o Venkataramanappa
Aged about 38 years.
6. Sreekantha
S/o Eralingappa
(since dead by LR:
6(a) Harish
S/o late Sreekantha
Aged about 25 years.
7. Huchamma
D/o Thimmaiah
Aged about 78 years.
Respondents 3 to 7 are
R/o Keregalapalya,
Kasaba Hobli, Madhugiri Taluk
Tumakuru District - 572 132.
8. Dasappa
S/o Chikkamma & Chikkabyatanna
Aged about 83 years.
9. Eradimmaiah
S/o Chikkamma & Chikkabyatanna
Aged about 75 years.
Respondents 8 and 9 are
R/o Hariharapura
MSA 8/2017
3
Dodderi Hobli
Madhugiri Taluk,
Tumakuru District - 572 132.
... RESPONDENTS
(R1, R2, R6(a) to R9 are served;
Appeal against R3 & R5 dismissed
Vide Order dated 05.07.2019)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
ORDER XLIII RULE 1(U) OF CPC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.09.2016, PASSED IN
R.A.NO.44/2013, BY ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
MADHUGIRI AND THEREBY CONFIRM THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
PASSED IN O.S. NO.270/2008 BY THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR
DIVISION), MADHUGIRI DATED 23.10.2010, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo not
pressing the present appeal.
In view of the memo and supporting submissions by
the learned counsel for the appellant who is physically
present in the Court, the appeal stands dismissed as not
pressed.
Sd/-
JUDGE sac*
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!