Karnataka High Court
Smt. Kavitha Kumari D/O Babulal ... vs The Secretary Sri Vidyashale Sri ... on 14 March, 2022
Bench: Sachin Shankar Magadum
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
R.F.A NO. 1928 OF 2012
BETWEEN:
SMT. KAVITHA KUMARI
D/O BABULAL BHANDARI
W/O JITENDRA KUMAR BAFNA
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
R/AT NO. 16, 8TH CROSS, RAJ NAGAR,
BEHIND EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE
HUBLI, DHARWAD DISTRICT
REP BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
AND FATHER SRI BABULAL BHANDARI
S/O ASTHAMULJI, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
R/AT NO 19, 2ND FLOOR,
SHRADDANANDA BHAWAN ROAD,
V V PURAM, BANGALORE-560004
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.V B SHIVA KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE SECRETARY
SRI VIDYASHALE SRI KASHYAPA GURUKULA
NO.57/3, ANJANEYA TEMPLE ROAD,
NARAYANA SETTYPET,
BANGALORE-560 002
2
2. SRI GORAVAPPA
S/O LATE POOJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT KONANAKUNTE VILLAGE
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
BANGALORE-560085.
3. SMT NINGAMMA
W/O LATE POOJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
R/AT KONANAKUNTE VILLAGE
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
BANGALORE-560085
SINCE DECEASED
REPRESENTED BY R2 AS
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE
4. SRI MANJUNATH
S/O SRI GORAVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT KONANAKUNTE VILLAGE
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
BANGALORE-560085
5. SRI JAGADEESHA
S/O SRI GORAVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
R/AT KONANAKUNTE VILLAGE
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
BANGALORE-560085
6. SMT NETHRAVATHI
W/O LOKESH
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
R/AT KONANAKUNTE VILLAGE
3
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
BANGALORE-560085
...RESPONDENTS
(V/O DTD 1/7/16 APPEAL STAND DISMISSED AGAINST R1;
V/O DTD 1/7/16 APPEAL ABATES AGAINST R3;
R2 IS TREATED AS LR OF DECD R3;
R4 SERVED)
THIS RFA IS FILED U/SEC.96(1) OF CPC, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.03.2011 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.15157/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE XXVIII-ADDL. CITY CIVIL
JUDGE, MAYO HALL, BANGALORE, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo
seeking withdrawal of the captioned appeal. Along with the
memo, the appellant has placed on record the order passed in
Execution Petition No.25175/2011. By placing reliance on the
judgment rendered by the Executing Court in the said
execution petition, the appellant claims that her rights have
been adjudicated in Execution Petition No.25175/2011.
Therefore, the present appeal which is filed questioning the
judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.15157/2005 would not
survive for consideration.
Memo is taken on record.
The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
In the light of withdrawal of the captioned appeal, the
Registry is directed to refund the Court fee in accordance with
law, if it is permissible.
The pending interlocutory applications do not survive for
consideration and accordingly stand disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
CA
