Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 11086 Kant
Judgement Date : 19 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:46320
MFA No. 6618 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6618 OF 2023 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
SMT. JAYALAKSHMAMMA
D/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
R/AT SAMPIGEHALLI VILLAGE
YELAHANKA HOBLI
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK
BENGALURU 560 064 ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. PRASHANTH P N.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SHARADAMMA
D/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
R/AT HOODI VILLAGE
Digitally signed
by K R PURAM HOBLI
DHANALAKSHMI MAHADEVAPURA POST
MURTHY BANGALROE EAST TALUK
Location: High BENGALURU 560 048.
Court of
Karnataka
2. SRI. RAJANNA
S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/AT SAMPIGEHALLI VILLAGE
YELAHANKA HOBLI
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK
BENGALURU 560 064.
3. SRI. B L NAGENDRA PRASAD
S/O LATE C V SHASTRI
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:46320
MFA No. 6618 of 2023
R/AT NO. 29/A, 9th CROSS
RMV EXTENSION, BENGALURU 560 094.
4. SRI. SUNIL KUMAR
S/O MUNIRAJU
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT NO. 2, J B NAGAR
BANASWADI MAIN ROAD
BENGALURU 560 033.
5. MRS. PATEL VENTURES
HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 61
J M ROAD, BENGALURU 560 002
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARNTERS
SRI. VIKARAM JAIN
S.O BHEEMARAJ
AGED MAJOR.
6. M/S BOTHRA LEASING SERVICES
HAVING AN OFFICE AT NO. 2
SHAUGHNESSY ROAD
LONG FORD, GARDEN, SHANTHINAGAR
BENGALURU 560 025
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNERS SIGNATORY
SRI. MANISH KUMAR BOTHRA
S/O RAJENDRA KUMAR BOTHRA
AGED MAJOR ...RESPONDENTS
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC,
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24.07.2023 PASSED
IN FDP.NO. 25023/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE XXVI ADDITIONAL
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU
(CCH-20).
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by defendant under Order 43 Rule
1(r) of CPC, challenging the non-consideration of the
NC: 2023:KHC:46320
application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC in FDP
proceedings in FDP No.25023/2023.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he
has sought relief only against respondent Nos. 5 and 6 in the
FDP proceedings. He sought ad-interim temporary injunction
only against respondent Nos. 5 and 6. Respondent Nos. 5
and 6 have been served. Inspite of that, the court has not
considered the application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and
2.
3. In view of the above, I pass the following order:
(i) The appeal stands disposed of.
(ii) The trial court is directed to dispose of the
application filed by the appellant/defendant under Order 39
Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, on the next date of hearing.
(iii) All pending applications stand disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
CM
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!