Mukthesab vs Mehaboobsab
2022 Latest Caselaw 7819 Kant

                            -1-




                                        RFA No. 1774 of 2006




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

         DATED THIS THE 31st DAY OF MAY, 2022

                          BEFORE
         THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
     REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1774 OF 2006 (DEC-)


BETWEEN:

     MUKTHESAB S/O IMAMSAB BAGAWAN CHOUDHARI,
     AGE 66 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O BADAMI, TQ; BADAMI, DIST; BAGALKOT-587201

                                                 ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GIRIJA S HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.   MEHABOOBSAB S/O IMAMSAB BAGAWAN @ CHOUDHARI,
     AGE 45 OCC;AGRIL, R/O BADAMI, TQ; BADAMI-587201

2.   LALSAB S/O IMAMSAB BAGAWAN @ CHOUDHARI
     MAJOR, OCC; AGRIL, R/O NARAYANAPUR,
     TQ; SURAPUR,DIST; GULBARGA-585103

3.   SMT FAIRAJA BEGUM HUSENSAB CHOUDHARI
     AGE;MAJOR, OCC;HOSUEHOLD,R/O NARAYANAPUR,
     TQ; SURAPUR-585103

4.   SMT. NAZAMABEGUN ABDULSAB CHOUDHARI
     AGED;MAJOR OCC; HOUSEHOLD,
     R/O BADAMI, TQ; BADAMI, BAGALKOT-586101

5.   SMT. SHABANABANU MAHAMODSAB BAGAWAN
     AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
     R/O MAMADAPUR TQ; BIJAPUR.

6.   UTALASAB MOHAMMADSAB BAGAWAN
     AGE: MAJOR, OCC;BUSINESS,
     R/O MAMADAPUR TQ; BIJAPUR-586101
                              -2-




                                         RFA No. 1774 of 2006


7.    ARIF MOHAMMADSAB BAGAWAN
      AGE:MAJOR, OCC;BUSINESS,
      R/O MAMADAPUR TQ; BIJAPUR-586101



                                               ...RESPONDENTS
(SRI. MRUTYUNJAYA S. HALLIKERI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2;
NOTICE TO R3 TO R7 ARE SERVED)

      THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER 41
RULE 1 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
28.06.2006 PASSED IN O.S.NO.134/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE I
ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR. DN.), BAGALKOT, DISMISSING THE SUIT
FOR DECLARATION AND PARMAMENT INJUNCTION.
     THIS RFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT
MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                         JUDGMENT

Sri. Mrutyunjaya S. Hallikeri, learned counsel for the

respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that, the appeal has been

abated in view of the death of the appellant. In that view

of the matter, no further orders are required.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as abated.

Sd/-

JUDGE SVH