Mrs Leelavathi @ vs M/S New Taj Mahal
2023 Latest Caselaw 4781 Kant

                                                  -1-
                                                          NC: 2023:KHC:25610
                                                            RSA No. 2090 of 2015




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                               DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

                                               BEFORE
                       THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
                           REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 2090 OF 2015 (POS)
                      BETWEEN:

                      1.    MRS LEELAVATHI @
                            RANJAN BAI ,
                            WIFE OF LATE SRI RASIKLAL SHET (SINCE
                            DECEASED )BY LRS

                            MR. KIRAN R. SANGHVI,
                            SON OF LATE RASIKLAL SHET,
                            AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS.

                      2.    MR. PRADEEP R. SANGHVI,
                            SON OF LATE RASIKLAL SHET ,
                            AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

                            BOTH ARE RESIDING AT RASIKLAL
                            CHAMBERS, MARKET ROAD,
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA             MANGALORE - 575 001.
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH                                                      ...APPELLANTS
COURT OF
KARNATAKA             (BY SRI. B.V. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      1.    M/S NEW TAJ MAHAL,
                            CAFE (P) LTD, REPRESETNED BY
                            ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
                            MR. KUDUPI VAMAN SHENOY,
                            SON OF LATE KUDUPI SRINIVAS SHENOY,
                            D NO.13-5-567,
                             -2-
                                   NC: 2023:KHC:25610
                                       RSA No. 2090 of 2015




     HAMPANKATTA,
     MANGALORE - 575 001.

2.   MR. KUDUPI VAMAN SHENOY ,
     SON OF LATE
     KUDUPI SRINIVAS SHENOY,
     MANAGING DIRECTOR OF
     M/S NEW TAJ MAHAL CAFE (P) LTD,
     D NO.13-5-567,
     HAMPANKATTA,
     MANGALORE - 575 001.

3.   MR. KUDUPI JAGADISH SHENOY,
     SON OF LATE KUDUPI SRINIVAS SHENOY,
     DIRECTOR OF M/S NEW
     TAJ MAHAL CAFE (P) LTD,
     D NO.13-5-567, HAMPANKATTA,
     MANGALORE - 575 001.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VIJAY KRISHNA BHAT, ADVOCATE)

      THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC.,1908
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.07.2015
PASSED IN RA. NO.2/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE 3RD ADDL.
SR. CIVIL JUDGE, MANGALORE.DK., ALLOWING THE APPEAL
AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
25.8.2012 PASSED IN OS.NO.61/2007 ON THE FILE OF I ADDL.
CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC., MANGALORE D.K.,

     THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                       JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel for appellant.

NC: 2023:KHC:25610 RSA No. 2090 of 2015

2. The learned counsel for the appellants has filed

memo seeking withdrawal of the appeal. The said memo

is signed by the learned counsel for the appellants and

appellants no.1 and 2.

The memo reads as under:

The appeal is filed against the judgment

dated 27.07.2015 in R.A. No. 2/2013 passed by

the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mangaluru,

whereunder it directed that the plaint be

returned to the plaintiffs/appellants to be

presented before the appropriate forum.

The appellants submit that due to a bona

fide mistake, the order returning the plaint has

been challenged in this Regular Second Appeal

under Section 100 of the Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908. As such, the appeal is not

maintainable in view of the appellate remedy

available to the appellants under Order XLIII

Rule 1(a), CPC.

NC: 2023:KHC:25610 RSA No. 2090 of 2015

The appellants respectfully submit that

they are willing to comply with the direction

passed by the first appellate court in the

impugned judgment to re-present the plaint

before the appropriate forum. Hence, the

appellants most respectfully pray that this

Hon'ble Court be pleased to permit them to

withdraw this appeal reserving liberty to them

to re-present the plaint before the appropriate

forum.

3. In view of the memo, the appeal is dismissed as

withdrawn with liberty to re-present the plaint before the

appropriate forum.

4. In view of the withdrawal of appeal, the

I.A.No.1/2017 does not survive for consideration.

Sd/-

JUDGE TS

CT:SNN