Karnataka High Court
Sri K H Manjappa S/O Hanumanthaiah vs Manjunath on 4 March, 2022
Bench: R. Nataraj
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.355 OF 2011 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. K.H. MANJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
S/O HANUMANTHAIAH,
RESIDINT AT NO.165,
4TH MAIN, 4TH PHASE,
WEST OF CHORD ROAD,
BASAVESHWARA NAGARA,
BANGALORE - 560 079.
2. SRI. B S SOMASHEKARA,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
S/O LATE SIDDAPPA,
NO.2, NEW TIMBER LAYOUT,
RAGHAVENDRA NAGARA,
MYSORE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 026.
3. SRI. N. MANJUNATHA,
S/O NANJUNDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
NO. 11, 2ND MAIN,
ATTIGUPE, VIJAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 010.
4. SRI. BYRESH,
S/O SRI. RAMAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
NO.631, 10TH G MAIN,
RAJAJINAGAR VI BLOCK,
BANGALORE - 560 068.
2
5. M/S SNN PROPERTIES,
A LIMITED LIABILITY
PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING IT'S REGISTERED
OFFICE AT NO.3761/60, 61/2
AND 63, RAJ LAKE VIEW,
N.S.PALYA MAIN ROAD,
BTM LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE,
BILEKAHALLI VILLAGE,
BANGALORE - 76.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER,
M/S SNN BUILDER PVT. LTD.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
SRI. NITIN AGARWAL.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.BIPIN HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR A1 TO A4;
SRI.M.R.KRISHNAMURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR
M/S.GOWTHAM ASSTS., ADVOCATES FOR A5)
AND:
1. MANJUNATH,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
2. MANJULA,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
3. BHAVANI,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
4. KUM. GEETHA,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
ALL CHILDREN OF SRI.K M KRISHNA REDDY,
AND R/A KOODLU VILLAGE,
SARJAPURA VILLAGE,
ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE.
5. SMT. K M VENKATASWAMY,
SINCE DEAD BY LRS
3
a. LALITHAMMA,
W/O K M VENKATASWAMY,
AGED MAJOR,
b. V. PRABHAKAR,
AGED MAJOR,
S/O K M VENKATASWAMY,
c. MANJULA,
AGED MAJOR,
D/O K M VENKATASWAMY,
6. SRI. K M KRISHNA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
S/O LATE H.MUNIYAPPA,
7. SRI. V. PRABHAKARA,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
S/O K. VENKATASWAMY,
8. SRI. M. KANTHARAJU,
MAJOR,
S/O LATE H.MUNIYAPPA,
9. PANITRA,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
D/O KANTHARAJU,
10. ABHILASH,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
S/O KANTHARAJU,
ALL ARE R/A KOODLU VILLAGE,
SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE.
11. SMT. JAYAMMA,
W/O NARASIMHA REDDY,
D/O H.MUNIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 286/1,
BOMMANAHALLI, BEGUR ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 068.
4
12. SMT. HAMSA,
W/O JAGADISH,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
D/O H. MUNIYAPPA,
NO.710, SOMASUNDARAPALYA,
NEAR KCDC MADIVALA POST,
BANGALORE - 560068
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SHANKAR REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-4;
R-6, R-8 TO R10, R-12 ARE SERVED;
NOTICE TO R5(a-c), R7 AND R11 ARE HELD SUFFICIENT
VIDE ORDER DATED 03.04.2017)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 28.08.2010 PASSED IN RA.NO.100/2008 ON THE FILE
OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE, DISMISSING THE
APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
06.10.2005 PASSED IN O.S.NO.625/1995 ON THE FILE OF THE
1ST ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.), BENGALORE RURAL
DISTRICT, BANGALORE.
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This regular second appeal is filed against the
preliminary decree of partition in O.S.No.625/1995 on the
file of I Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Bangaluru Rural
District, Bengaluru. In the mean while, the final decree
proceedings were initiated in FDP.No.28/2006 against
which, regular appeal is filed by appellant No.5. It is stated
that the parties have entered into a settlement, in terms of
which, the properties in the suit is allotted to the share of
appellant No.5. In that view of the matter, learned counsel
for the appellants has filed memo stating that he is not
interested to pursue this appeal.
2. In view of the memo, this appeal is dismissed
as not pressed in view of the settlement arrived between
the parties.
Sd/-
JUDGE
NR/-
