Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 4605 Kant
Judgement Date : 18 July, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:24959
CRP No. 292 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.292 OF 2023 (SC)
BETWEEN:
SRI B. NAGESH,
S/O SRINIVAS,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT C/I SRI RAGHAVENDRA HOTEL,
BASAVESHWARA COMPLEX,
COGILU MAIN ROAD,
NEAR KARLAPPA COMPLEX,
BENGALURU-560 064.
AND ALSO R/AT NO.955/5,
PAPANNA LAYOUT,
KOGILU MAIN ROAD,
MARUTHI NAGAR, YELAHANKA,
BENGALURU-560 064.
...PETITIONER
Digitally signed
by SHARANYA T
Location: HIGH (BY SRI RAMANA G, ADVOCATE)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
SMT. BHAGYA,
W/O LATE MUNIRAJU,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT NO.10, BHADRANNA LAYOUT,
KOGILU MAIN RAOD,
MARUTHI NAGAR, YELAHANKA,
BENGALURU-560 064.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI M. RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:24959
CRP No. 292 of 2023
THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 18 OF SMALL CAUSE
COURT ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
17.01.2023 PASSED IN SC.NO.1029/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE
VIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND ACMM, COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES, BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR EJECTMENT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This matter is listed for admission today. Heard the
learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel
for the respondent.
2. The learned counsel for the respondent submits
that already possession is taken in view of the decree and
decree is also for eviction and the defendant was directed
to vacate the schedule property and pay the arrears of rent
within 60 days.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- is paid to the husband of
the respondent herein.
4. In this regard, the learned counsel for the
respondent brought to the notice of this Court paragraph
No.12 of the Trial Court order, wherein the Trial Court has
NC: 2023:KHC:24959 CRP No. 292 of 2023
discussed that though the document is relied upon, the
same is an unstamped document and also stamp duty is
not paid and not marked the document inspite of sufficient
opportunity is given.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner not
disputes the fact that the document was not marked before
the Trial Court. When such being the case, in this revision
petition this Court cannot decide the same. If the
petitioner is having any grounds against the same, he can
seek for appropriate relief before the appropriate Court and
this petition does not survive for consideration as already
the possession is taken by the respondent consequent upon
the decree passed in S.C.No.1029/2020.
6. The petition is dismissed as having become
infructuous.
Sd/-
JUDGE
MD
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!