Miss Pradnya @ Gouri D/O. Gurunath ... vs Shri. Ajit S/O. Madhukar ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 444 Kant

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                        PRESENT

     THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
                          AND
          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RACHAIAH

                   RFA NO.100226/2018
BETWEEN:
1.      MISS PRADNYA @ GOURI D/O. GURUNATH NARAGUNDKAR,
        AGE 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
        R/O. CTS NO.1118/1, KULKARNI GALLI, BELAGAVI.
2.    MRS. SOUDNYA @ GEETA D/O. GURUNATH NARAGUNDKAR
      [AFTER MARRIAGE KNOWN AS SOUNDYA
      W/O. SHIRISH DESHPANDE]
      AGE 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
      REPRESENTED BY HER GPA HOLDER
      MISS. PRADNYA @ GOURI D/O.
      GURUNATH NARAGUNDKAR, R/O. CTS NO.1118/1,
      KULKARNI GALLI, BELAGAVI.
                                          ... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SANGRAM S. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SHRI. AJIT S/O. MADHUKAR VALSANGKAR,
AGE 52 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE,
R/O. FLAT NO.1 F 1-2,
ADITYA JYOTHI APARTMENTS BHOSALE MALA,
RADHIKA ROAD, NEAR S.T. STAND, SATARA,
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT BLOCK NO.2,
SENAPATI BAPAT SOCIETY,
SENAPATI BAPAT ROAD, OPP. RATNA HOSPITAL,
PUNE - 411016, MAHARASHTRA STATE
                                          .. RESPONDENT
(SRI. SHREEVATSA HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT)
                                                 RFA No.100226/2018
                                2


      THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.04.2018 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.206/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE, BELAGAVI, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FILED
FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH
PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, DR. H. B.
PRABHAKARA SASTRY, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                              ORDER

Learned counsels from both sides are physically

present in the Court.

2. The appellants have filed a memo seeking

withdrawal of this appeal, as settled between the parties.

3. Heard the submission from both sides.

4. Learned counsels from both sides make their

submission seeking permission to withdraw this appeal as

settled between the parties.

5. Perused the memo for withdrawal dated

15.04.2021 filed by the appellants, wherein, the appellants

have stated that the parties to this appeal have entered into RFA No.100226/2018

a registered partition deed, as such, they have settled the

matter.

6. Though they have prayed for disposal of this

appeal as settled in terms of the registered partition deed,

considering the fact that it is only a memo filed for

withdrawal of the appeal as not pressed, the Court cannot

record the terms of the settlement or the alleged entering

into a registered partition deed, except taking on record that

the appellants are not proceeding further in this appeal.

7. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed as

withdrawn.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

*Svh/-