Shankramma W/O Gurunathreddy And ... vs Gurulingamma D/O Hanmantharaya ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 3938 Kant

                             1




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  KALABURAGI BENCH

     DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                          BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI


           RFA No.200039/2015 (PAR/POS)

Between:

1.    Shankramma W/o Gurnathreddy,
      Age: 47 years, Occ: Household,
      R/o Yevoor, Tq. Shorapur,
      Dist: Yadgiri, now at Hadnoor,
      C/o Ningangouda S/o Shevamanapagouda Desai,
      Tq: Shorapur, Dist: Yadgiri-585 224.

2.    Kantamma D/o gurnathreddy,
      Age: 19 years, Occ: Student,
      R/o Yewoor, Tq: Shorapur,
      Dist: Yadgiri, now at Hadnoor
      C/o Ninganagouda S/o Shevamanapagouda Desai,
      Tq: Shorapur, Dist: Yadgiri-585 224.

3.    Bhagya D/o Gurnathreddy,
      Age: 16 years (Minor), U/g of her
      Natural mother Shankramma W/o Gurunathreddy,
      Age: 47 years, Occ: Household,
      R/o Yevoor, Tq: Shorapur, Dist: Yadgiri,
      Now at Hadnoor
      C/o Ninganagouda S/o Shevamanapagouda Desai,
      Tq: Shorapur, Dist: Yadgiri-585 224.
                                               ... Appellants
(By Sri. Shivanand Patil, Advocate)
                              2




And:

1.     Gurulingamma D/o Hanmantharaya
       W/o Shekharappagouda,
       Age: 57 years, Occ: Household,
       R/o Yevoor, Tq: Shorapur, Dist: Yadgiri-585 224.

2.     Laxmi alleged W/o Gurnathreddy,
       Age: 46 years, Occ: Household,
       R/o Yewoor, Tq: Shorapur,
       Dist: Yadgiri-585 224.

3.     Hareshreddy alleged S/o Gurunathreddy,
       Age: 16 years Minor.

4.     Anandreddy alleged S/o gurnathreddy,
       Age: 14 years Minor.

       Respondent No.3 and 4 minors
       And U/g of their natural mother and
       Respondent No.2 Laxmi
       alleged W/o Gurunathreddy,
       Age: 46 years, Occ: Household,
       R/o Yevoor, Tq: Shorapur,
       Dist: Yadgiri-585 224.
                                             ... Respondents

(By Sri.Ganesh Naik, Advocate for R1;
R3 & R4 are minors,
By Sri.V.S.Patil, Advocate for R2)


       This Regular First Appeal is filed under Section 96
R/w Order 41 Rule 1 of CPC, 1908 praying to call for the
records, hear the parties and allow the appeal and
consequently set aside or modify the impugned judgment
and decree dated 04.02.2015 in OS No.52/2013 of the
Senior Civil Judge Shorapur and consequently dismiss the
suit of the plaintiff in the interest of justice and equity.
                              3




      This appeal coming on for final hearing, this day, the
Court delivered the following:-


                       JUDGMENT

This appellants have filed a memo stating that

both the parties have compromised the dispute in

W.P.No.204403/2018 disposed on 08.10.2021 and in

view of the same, the appeal may be disposed off.

Memo is placed on record.

In view of settlement between the parties

nothing survives for consideration. Accordingly, the

appeal is disposed off.

In view of the disposal of appeal, IA.No.2/2015

does not survive for consideration.

Sd/-

JUDGE

msr