Balaji S/O Ramesh Barge vs Hanamanthrao S/O Late Sangappa ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2200 Kant

                            1




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  KALABURAGI BENCH
        DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2021
                        BEFORE
          THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.DESAI
               MSA NO.200238/2018 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
BALAJI
S/O RAMESH BARGE
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
OCC: ADVOCATE & AGRICULTURE
R/O MADNOOR VILLAGE
TQ. AURAD-B, DIST. BIDAR.
                                             ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI. RAVI B. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

01.    HANMANTHARAO
       S/O LATE SANGAPPA BARGE
       AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS,
       OCC: AGRICULTURE
       R/O VILLAGE MADNOOR
       TQ. AURAD-B, DIST. BIDAR - 585 401.

02.    NEELAMMA
       W/O LATE NAGENDRA
       AGE: 47 YEARS,
       OCC: AGRICULTURE
       R/O VILLAGE MADNOOR
       TQ. AURAD-B, DIST. BIDAR - 585 401.

03.    PREMSAGAR
       S/O LATE NAGENDRA
       AGE: 38 YEARS,
       OCC: SERVICE & AGRICULTURE
                            2




      R/O VILLAGE MADNOOR
      TQ. AURAD-B, DIST. BIDAR - 585 401.

04.   ASHOK
      S/O LATE NAGENDRA
      AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
      R/O VILLAGE MADNOOR
      TQ. AURAD-B, DIST. BIDAR - 585 401.

05.   SURYAKANTH
      S/O HANMANTHRAO BARGE
      AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
      R/O VILLAGE MADNOOR
      TQ. AURAD-B, DIST. BIDAR - 585 401.

06.   MAHADEVI
      W/O HANMANTHRAO BARGE
      AGE: 77 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD
      R/O VILLAGE MADNOOR
      TQ. AURAD-B, DIST. BIDAR - 585 401.

07.   SANJEEVKUMAR
      S/O RAMESH BARGE
      AGE: 30 YEARS,
      OCC: STUDENT & AGRICULTURE
      R/O VILLAGE MADNOOR
      TQ. AURAD-B, DIST. BIDAR - 585 401.

08.   RAMESH
      S/O HANAMANTHRAO BARGE
      AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
      R/O VILLAGE MADNOOR
      TQ. AURAD-B, DIST. BIDAR - 585 401.

09.   ABDUL GANI
      S/O MD. HASSAN SAB
      AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
                             3




     R/O NEAR DECENT FUNCTION HALL
     BIDAR - 585 401.
                                 ...RESPONDENTS


      THIS MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL IS FILED
UNDER SECTION 104 R/W. ORDER 43 RULE 1(U) OF
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE 1ST APPELLATE COURT IN
R.A.NO.19/2017 PASSED BY THE COURT OF ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BIDAR, DATED
06.08.2018, AND CONSEQUENTIALLY TO UPHOLD THE
JUDGMENT IN O.S.NO.62/2006 DATED 27.01.2014
PASSED BY THE COURT OF ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND ITINERARY COURT AT AURAD-B, IN THE INTEREST
OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                       JUDGMENT

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

suit is disposed of by the trial court and hence the appeal

has become infructuous.

Submission of learned counsel is taken on record.

2. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as having

become infructuous.

Sd/-

JUDGE *mn/-