Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 11286 Kant
Judgement Date : 20 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:46554
RFA No. 1990 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.1990 OF 2021 (EJE)
BETWEEN:
1. M/S. S.J.R. BUILDERS,
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING OFFICE AT:
PLOT NO.1, S.J.R. PRIMUS,
7TH AND 8TH FLOOR,
INDUSTRIAL LAYOUT,
KORAMANGALA 7TH BLOCK,
BENGALURU - 560 095,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNERS.
2. MR. J. BOOPESH REDDY,
S/O MR.JAYARAM REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
PARTNER OF M/S.S.J.R. BUILDERS,
Digitally PLOT NO.1, S.J.R. PRIMUS,
signed by R
MANJUNATHA 7TH AND 8TH FLOOR,
Location:
HIGH COURT INDUSTRIAL LAYOUT,
OF
KARNATAKA KORAMANGALA 7TH BLOCK,
BENGALURU - 560 095.
3. MR. J. VIJAY REDDY,
S/O MR. S JAYARAMA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
PARTNER OF M/S. S.J.R. BUILDERS,
PLOT NO.1, S.J.R. PRIMUS,
7TH AND 8TH FLOOR,
INDUSTRIAL LAYOUT,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:46554
RFA No. 1990 of 2021
KORAMANGALA 7TH BLOCK,
BENGALURU - 560 095,
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. AJAY RAO, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. K.C. RAMASWAMY REDDY,
S/O LATE SRI. CHIKKABBAIAH REDDY,
(SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL
REPRESENTATIVES NAMELY
RESPONDENTS NO.2-7)
2. SMT. SUKANYA,
W/O LATE SRI. K.C. RAMASWAMY REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.
3. SMT. SAVITHA R.,
W/O SRI. UMASHANKAR,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.
4. SMT. R. SANDYA,
W/O SRI. S. HARISH REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.
5. SMT. SANGEETHA R REDDY,
D/O SRI. K.C. RAMASWAMY REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
6. SMT. R. SINDHU
D/O SRI. K.C. RAMASWAMY REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS.
7. SRI. R. DHIRAJ,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
S/O K.C. RAMASWAMY REDDY.
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:46554
RFA No. 1990 of 2021
ALL ARE R/AT NO.147/E,
12TH MAIN ROAD, 3RD BLOCK,
KORAMANGALA LAYOUT,
BENGALURU - 560 034.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SURESH REDDY A.M., ADVOCATE FOR C/R2 TO R7)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.06.2021
PASSED IN O.S.NO.1057/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE XXII
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU,
PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR EJECTMENT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Despite granting sufficient time, office objections are
not complied.
2. Accordingly, appeal stands dismissed for non
prosecution.
Sd/-
JUDGE
AT
CT:SNN
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!