Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1073 Kant
Judgement Date : 24 January, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No.1529 OF 2015 (DEC)
BETWEEN:
MARININGASHETTY
SINCE DEAD BY HIS L.R's
1. SMT. NEELAMMA
W/O LATE MARININGASHETTY
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
R/AT VAJAMANGALA,
VARUNA HOBLI,
MYSORE TALUK
AND DISTRICT-570008.
2. SMT. PUTTAMMA
D/O LATE MARININGASHETTY,
W/O VENKATESH,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/AT NARAYANAPURA VILLAGE,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT-571434. ... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.V.F.KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. ERASHETTY
S/O LATE SIDDASHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
2
2. KEMPAMMA
W/O LATE SIDDARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
3. CHANDRAKALA
D/O LATE SIDDARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
4. SHEELA
D/O LATE SIDDARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,
5. MANJU
S/O LATE SIDDARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS,
6. NINGASHETTY
S/O LATE SIDDASHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
7. JAYAMMA
W/O LATE BASAVASHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
8. SIDDARAJU
S/O LATE BASAVASHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
9. SOMESH
S/O LATE BASAVASHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
10. BASAVARAJU
S/O LATE BASAVASHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
11. MAHADEVAMMA
W/O LATE SIDDASHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
3
12. MAHADEVASHETTY
S/O MARIMADASHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
RESPONDENTS 1 TO 12 ARE
R/AT VAJAMANGALA VILLAGE,
VARUNA HOBLI,
MYSORE TALUK AND
DISTRICT-570008.
13. YASHODA
W/O LATE KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT NO.266, 2ND CROSS,
10TH MAIN, 2ND STAGE,
BOGADI,
MYSORE-570026.
14. BASAVASHETTY
S/O LATE GUDIYANAMADASHETTY
@ GUDIYASHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
15. GUDIYANA MARISHETTY
S/O LATE GUDIYANAMADASHETTY
@ GUDIYASHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
16. GUDIYANA NINGASHETTY
S/O LATE GUDIYANAMADASHETTY
@ GUDIYASHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
RESPONDENTS 14 TO 16 ARE
R/AT VAJAMANGALA VILLAGE,
VARUNA HOBLI,
MYSORE TALUK AND
DISTRICT-570008. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.MADHUSUDHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R6&R11;
4
SRI.N.R.GIRISHA, ADVOCATE FOR R13;
V.O.D:06.02.2019 SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R1 IS
HELD SUFFICIENT; R2 TO R5, R7 TO R10, R12,
R14, R15 AND R16 ARE SERVED AND
UNREPRESENTED)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF
CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED
17.06.2014 PASSED IN R.A.NO.1223/2010 ON THE FILE
OF THE IV ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, MYSORE, DISMISSING
THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND
DECREE DATED 13.09.2010 PASSED IN OS.NO.46/1998
ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, MYSORE.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the appellants seeks leave of the
Court to withdraw the appeal since all the necessary
parties have not been arrayed and the appeal is likely to
fail on that ground.
2. The request of the learned counsel for the
appellants is accepted and he is permitted to withdraw the
appeal with liberty to file a fresh suit.
3. Necessary memo to be filed within a period of
week.
Appeal is dismissed with liberty reserved to the
appellants to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action.
Sd/-
JUDGE
JS/-
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!