Smt. Muniyamma vs Sri Murari
2022 Latest Caselaw 3886 Kant

                         1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                       BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

      REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.1840 OF 2018 (PAR)


BETWEEN:

SMT.MUNIYAMMA
W/O SRI.ASHWATHAPPA
D/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
RESIDING AT
NO.22, BHOOPASANDRA MAIN ROAD
NAGASHETTYHALLI
R.M.V 2ND STAGE POST
BENGALURU - 560094

                                        ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI.S.V.BOJARAJA, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.     SRI.MURARI
       S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
       AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
       RESIDING AT
       NAGAVARA
       KASABA HOBLI
       BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
       BENGALURU - 560045

2.     SMT.SAROJAMMA
       D/O LATE H.NARAYANAPPA
                            2



     AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
     RESIDING AT
     NO.942, "D" BLOCK
     2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS
     SAHAKARANAGARA
     BENGALURU - 560092

3.   SMT.JAYAMMA
     W/O JAYARAM
     D/O LATE H.NARAYANAPPA
     AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
     RESIDING AT
     GANTIGANAHALLI
     SINGANAYAKANAHALLI POST
     YELAHANKA HOBLI
     BENGALURU - 560064

                                        .....RESPONDENTS

     THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC.,
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 06.06.2012 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.25436/2007, ON THE FILE OF THE 28TH ADDL.
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, (CCH-29) AT
BENGALURU PERMITTING THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT TO
WITHDRAW THE SUIT WITH LIBERTY TO FILE FRESH SUIT
ONLY AGAINST DEFENDANT NO.3.

     THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

                      JUDGMENT

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has filed

a memo dated 19.02.2020 seeking withdrawal of the

above appeal as not pressed.

2. The said memo is taken on record.

3. In the said memo, the appellant has sought

liberty to re-open the case in O.S.No.25436/2007. The

said memo is cryptic and no reasons are assigned for

seeking liberty to re-open the case in O.S.No.25436/2007.

Therefore, such liberty cannot be granted.

4. This appeal is dismissed in terms of the above

said memo.

5. However, the latter part of the memo cannot be

entertained and no such liberty cannot be granted to the

appellant while withdrawing the appeal as not pressed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

NBM