Karnataka High Court
Smt. Shantha Nayak vs Mr. Sathishchandra Nayak on 14 August, 2023
Bench: K.Natarajan
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:28755
RFA No. 1099 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1099 OF 2023 (PAR/DEC)
BETWEEN:
SMT. SHANTHA NAYAK,
D/O LATE. M. VAMANA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
R/AT "NAGAPPA NAYAK",
JEPPU - MAHAKALI PADPU,
MANGALURU - 575 002.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. AJAY PRABHU M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MR. SATHISHCHANDRA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
S/O M. VAMANA NAYAK,
RESIDING AT SRI RAM, JEPPU,
Digitally signed by
MARNAMIKATTE,
C SOWMYA
Location: High
MANGALURU - 1.
Court of
Karnataka
2. ARUN KUMAR K. NAYAK,
S/O LATE. K. KRISHNAN NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS.
3. AMARNATH NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
S/O LATE. K. KRISHNAN NAYAK,
BOTH THE RESP. NO.2 AND 3 ARE
R/AT USHA NIVAS,
NEAR JEPPU POST OFFICE,
JEPPU, MARNAMIKATTE,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:28755
RFA No. 1099 of 2023
MANGALURU - 1.
4. SRI. ASHOK NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
S/O LATE. K. KRISHNAN NAYAK,
R/AT DOOR NO.21-4-487,
BOLAR, MANGALURU - 1.
5. SMT. SANDHYA A. RAO,
W/O ARUN RAO,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
R/AT "SHRI KRIPA",
TOURIST HOME,
NEAR R.T.O., STATION ROAD,
AURANGABAD - 431 001.
6. HARIDAS NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS,
H/O LATE. USHA NAYAK.
7. HARSHA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
S/O LATE. USHA NAYAK.
8. AISHWARYA PRABHU,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
S/O LATE. USHA NAYAK.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT LAXITON MANNER,
FLAT NO.34, S. MATHAIS ROAD,
HIGHLAND, MANGALURU - 1.
9. M. RATHNAKARA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS,
S/O M. VAMANA NAYAK,
RESIDING AT SRI RAM, JEPPU,
MARNAMIKATTE,
MANGALURU - 1.
10. M. SURENDRA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS,
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:28755
RFA No. 1099 of 2023
S/O M. VAMANA NAYAK,
RESIDING AT SRI RAM, JEPPU,
MARNAMIKATTE,
MANGALURU - 1.
11. SRI. RAVINDRA NAYAK,
S/O RAMACHANDRA NAYAK,
H/O LATE. JAYANTHI R. NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS.
12. PRIYA PAI,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
D/O LATE. JAYANTHI R. NAYAK.
13. RESHAN KINI,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
D/O LATE. JAYANTHI R. NAYAK.
14. SURAJ KIRAN NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
S/O LATE. JAYANTHI R. NAYAK.
ALL ARE RESP. NO.11 TO 14 ARE
R/AT 'VASANTHAASHRAMA,
MPT ROAD, CAR STREET,
MANGALURU.
15. M. RAMESH NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
S/O M. DAMODHARA NAYAK,
SRI GANESH, MORGANSGATE,
MANGALURU.
16. SMT. MUKTHA NAYAK,
W/O LATE. DAMODHARA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS.
17. RAKESH NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
S/O LATE. DAMODHARA NAYAK.
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:28755
RFA No. 1099 of 2023
18. ROSHNI NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
D/O LATE. DAMODHARA NAYAK.
ALL THE RESP. NO.16 TO 18 ARE
R/AT "MANGALA",
SILVA CROSS ROAD,
NEAR P.F. OFFICE,
MANGALURU - 575 002.
19. SMT. HEMALATHA NAYAK,
W/O LATE. DEVADAS NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,
M. VAMANA NAYAK AND SONS,
JEPPU, MARNAMIKATTE,
MANGALURU - 1.
20. KIRANA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
W/O RAVI SHETTY,
ABHIMAN CHAMBERS,
FLAT NO.406, NEAR CITY HOSPITAL,
KADRI, MANGALURU - 01.
21. SHOBHA NAYAK,
W/O LATE. VIJAYA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.
22. ADITHI,
D/O LATE. VIJAYA NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS.
23. KUMARI ASTHA,
AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS.
D/O LATE. VIJAYA NAYAK.
RESP. NO.22 AND 23 ARE MINORS
REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND
NATURAL GUARDIAN,
RESP. NO.21 AND ALL ARE
R/AT M. VAMANA NAYAK AND SONS,
-5-
NC: 2023:KHC:28755
RFA No. 1099 of 2023
JEPPU, MARNAMIKATE,
MANGALURU - 1.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED:01.07.2022 AND
DECREE DATED:15.07.2022 PASSED IN OS.NO.78/2013 ON
THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM
MANGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Office has raised an objection regarding the
maintainability of the appeal as pecuniary jurisdiction does
not exceed Rs.10,00,000/-.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
he would file a memo seeking permission of this Court to
withdraw the appeal with liberty to file the appeal before
the District Judge.
3. The memo and said submission of the learned
counsel for the appellant is taken on record.
Hence, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with
liberty to file the appeal before the District Judge.
NC: 2023:KHC:28755
RFA No. 1099 of 2023
However, the appellant is entitled for the benefit
under Section 14 of the Limitation Act.
Office is directed to return the documents to the
learned counsel for the appellant.
In view of the dismissal of the main appeal,
I.A.No.1/2023, does not survive for consideration and the
same is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SMC
CT:PH
