Sri Lokanath vs Smt. Siddamma
2022 Latest Caselaw 6238 Kant

                             1


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

           DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022

                          BEFORE

    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

             REVIEW PETITION NO.77 OF 2022
                           IN
                  R.F.A NO.20 OF 2013

BETWEEN:

SRI LOKANATH
S/O LATE M KRISHNAPPA @ MUNIKRISHNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT SULAKUNTE COLONY
VARTHUR HOBLI
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK

                                              ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI.RANJITH K S, ADVOCATE-ABSENT)

AND:

1. SMT. SIDDAMMA
W/O LATE C MUNINANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 99 YEARS
R/AT 28, OBALAPPA STREET
CHIKKAMAVALI, BENGALURU -560 004

2. SRI MUNIYAPPA
S/O C MUNINANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS

3. SRI ESHWARAPPA
S/O C MUNINANJAPPA
                             2


AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS

4. SRI NARAYANAPPA
S/O C MUNINANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

5. SRI THIRTHAGIRI
S/O MUNINANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

6. SRI SREENIVAS
S/O C MUNINANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

7. SRI SREEDHAR
S/O C MUNINANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS

RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 7
R/AT 28, OBALAPPA STREET
CHIKKAMAVALI, BENGALURU -560 004

8. SMT LEELA GANDHI
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
W/O LATE B S GANDHI
R/AT NO.39, 30TH MAIN
2ND CROSS, 1ST PHASE
2ND STAGE, B T M LAYOUT
BENGALURU-560078

                                           ...RESPONDENTS

     THIS RP IS FILED UNDER RULE 1 OF ORDER XLVII OF CPC,
PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED: 06.02.2020 PASSED IN
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.20/2020 ON THE FILE OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT AND GRANT SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER RELIEFS
AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
AND EQUITY.
                                     3


    THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                               ORDER

None appears for the petitioner.

2. This Court on a memo filed by the appellant-

petitioner herein dismissed the appeal in RFA.No.20/2013 as

withdrawn on 6.2.2020. It is against the said judgment, the

present review petition is filed.

3. The office has raised an objection in regard to the

maintainability of the review petition.

4. The appellant has voluntarily withdrawn the appeal

stating that the matter is settled out of Court. If there is any

element of fraud it gives a fresh cause of action. Therefore,

review petition is not maintainable.

5. Accordingly, the review petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

*alb/-