Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 3896 Kant
Judgement Date : 3 July, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:22785
RP No. 284 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REVIEW PETITION NO. 284 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SHANTHI
W/O MAHADEVA,
D/O LATE R. SOMU,
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS,
R/AT NO.1/130/2, ROAD NO.5,
KAMALANAGAR,
HYDERABAD-500 062.
2. SMT. RATHNAMMA
W/O LATE VEDAPRAKASH,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
3. SRI S.S. VINOD @ V. DINESH
S/O VEDAPRAKASH,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
Digitally signed
by SHARANYA T
Location: HIGH THE PETITIONERS NO.2 AND 3 ARE
COURT OF R/AT NO.201, 2ND MAIN,
KARNATAKA
JAYALAKSHMIPURAM,
MYSORE-560006.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. VIJAY KUMAR T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. K.R. VASANTHA
W/O LATE S.R. CHANDRASHEKAR,
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:22785
RP No. 284 of 2023
2. SMT. C. KAVITHA
D/O LATE S R CHANDRASHEKAR,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
BOTH RESPONDENTS
R/AT NO.129, 5TH MAIN,
4TH BLOCK, 2ND PHASE,
BSK 3RD STAGE,
BANGALORE-560 085.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114
READ WITH ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO PASS AN
ORDER ALLOWING THE PRESENT REVIEW PETITION SEEKING
REVIEW OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06/03/2023 PASSED BY
THIS COURT IN R.S.A. NO.1170/2021 (PAR) ONLY IN SO FOR
AS 1/4TH SHARE INSTEAD OF 1/3RD SHARE, IN THE INTEREST
OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This review petition is filed to review the judgment and
order dated 06.03.2023 passed by this Court in
R.S.A.No.1170/2021.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the review
petitioners would submit that there was a typographical error
NC: 2023:KHC:22785 RP No. 284 of 2023
crept in R.S.A.No.1170/2021 at paragraph No.15 of the
judgment.
4. This Court in R.S.A.No.1170/2021 at paragraph
No.15 has observed that having perused the material available
on record and also the reasoning given by both the Trial Court
as well as the First Appellate Court had given anxious
consideration to the material on record and hence, rightly came
to the conclusion that the plaintiffs are entitled for 1/3rd share
in the suit schedule property. Instead of mentioning 1/4th, it is
mentioned as 1/3rd. Hence, the same is corrected by reviewing
the order as 1/4th instead of 1/3rd in paragraph No.15 of the
judgment.
5. Accordingly, the Review Petition is allowed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
CP
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!