Karnataka High Court
P M Abubacker vs Smt. Nafeesa on 27 July, 2023
Bench: Ravi V Hosmani
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:26158
WP No. 48444 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
WRIT PETITION NO. 48444 OF 2018 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
P. M. ABUBACKER
S/O LATE MAMMUNHI
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
R/AT KOTTUR VILLAGE
CHERAMBANE POST
MADIKERI TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 235
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. LETHIF B, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. NAFEESA
W/O LATE P. M. KAMALUDDIN
Digitally signed by AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
MOHANKUMAR M
Location: High
Court of Karnataka 2. SMT. NOOR JAHAN
W/O LATE P. M. KAMALUDDIN
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
3. SRI MOHAMMED NIYAZ
S/O LATE P. M. KAMALUDDIN
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
ALL ARE RESIDING AT:
BAJEKOLLI TOWN AND POST
UDUPI DISTRICT - 578 110
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:26158
WP No. 48444 of 2018
4. SMT. KUNHI ALEEMA
W/O LATE P. M. ABDUL RAHIMAN
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
5. SRI P. A. FAIZAL
S/O LATE P. M. ABDUL RAHIMAN
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
BOTH R4 TO R5 RESIDING AT
KOTTUR VILLAGE, CHERAMBANE POST
MADIKERI TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 235
6. SMT. RABIYA
W/O MOHAMMED
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/AT: AIYANGERI VILLAGE AND POST
MADIKERI TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 235
7. SMT. SAMEERA P. A
W/O ABUBACKER
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/AT: KODANGERI VILLAGE AND POST
MADIKERI TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 235
8. SRI AKBAR P. A
S/O LATE ABDUL RAHIMAN
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
9. SRI SHARFUDDIN
S/O LATE ABDUL RAHIMAN
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
10. SRI JALEEL P. A
S/O LATE ABDUL RAHIMAN
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:26158
WP No. 48444 of 2018
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
11. SRI P. A. SHAREEF
S/O LATE ABDUL RAHIMAN
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
12. SRI NASIR
S/O LATE ABDUL RAHIMAN
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
ALL ARE RESIDING AT:
KOTTUR VILLAGE, CHERAMBANE POST
MADIKERI TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 235
13. SRI P. M. ALI
S/O LATE MAMMUNHI
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
14. SRI P. M. YUSUF
S/O LATE MAMMUNHI
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT:
KOTTUR VILLAGE, CHERAMBANE POST
MADIKERI TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 235
15. SRI APPARANDA A. BIDDAPPA
S/O LATE APPACHU
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
16. SMT. A. B. RATHI BIDDAPPA
W/O A. A. BIDDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT:
KOTTUR VILLAGE, CHERAMBANE POST
MADIKERI TALUK
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:26158
WP No. 48444 of 2018
MADIKERI TALUK
KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 235
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHREERAM TIMMAPPA NAYAK, ADVOCATE FOR
R1 TO R3;
R4, R6, R7, R8, R9, R12, R14, R15, R16 - SERVED;
R13(A), R13(B), R13(C), R13(D), R13(E), R13(F), R13(H)-
SERVED)
(IA.I-3/2021 TO BRING ON RECORD LR'S OF DECEASED R13 IS
PENDING)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR
RECORDS;QUASH THE ORDER DATED 07.07.2017 PASSED BY
THE 1ST ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, KODAGU AT MADIKERI, IN
R.A.NO.52/2016 AT ANNEXURE-A, CONSEQUENTLY, RESTORE
THE APPEAL IN R.A.NO.52/2016 TO THE 1ST ADDL. DISTRICT
JUDGE, KODAGU AT MADIKERI TO DISPOSE THE APPEAL ON
MERIT AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This writ petition is filed seeking for following reliefs:
(i) Issue writ or writ of certiorari to quash order
dated 07.07.2017 passed by I Additional District
Judge, Kodagu at Madikeri, in R.A. no.52/2016 at
Annexure-A, consequently, restore appeal in R.A.
NC: 2023:KHC:26158
WP No. 48444 of 2018
No.52/2016 to I Additional District Judge, Kodagu at
Madikeri to dispose appeal on merit etc.
2. Writ petition is filed by appellant in RA.no.52/2016 at
Annexure-A dismissed on 07.07.2017 on ground of pecuniary
jurisdiction. Said appeal was filed against judgment and decree
dated 02.09.2016 in O.S.no.91/2011 wherein petitioner was
defendant no.1.
3. Counsel for respondent submitted that during
pendency of proceedings, final decree had been drawn in terms
of preliminary decree, on 03.02.2020. A memo is filed
producing certified copy of final decree drawn. It was submitted
that in view of above, writ petition was rendered infructuous.
4. On perusal of memo, it is seen that in final decree
proceedings, petitioner herein is respondent no.2 and final
decree is drawn in 03.02.2020. It is not placed on record
whether same has been challenged or not. In any case, writ
petition is rendered infructuous and dismissed as such.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Mkm :CT: BHK
