Smt. Pushpalatha vs M. Keshava Reddy
2024 Latest Caselaw 19728 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Smt. Pushpalatha vs M. Keshava Reddy on 6 August, 2024

                                            -1-
                                                     NC: 2024:KHC:31108-DB
                                                      RFA No. 2238 of 2018




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                      DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

                                          PRESENT
              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR
                                            AND
                      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA


                  REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2238 OF 2018 (MON)


             BETWEEN:


             1.    Smt. Pushpalatha
                   Aged about 45 years,
                   W/o Late K V Ravi

             2.    Kum. Monisha
                   Aged about 16 years,
                   D/o late K V Ravi


Digitally    3.    Master Sanjay
signed by
VEERENDRA          Aged about 14 years,
KUMAR K M
                   S/o Late K V Ravi,
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA    4.    Master Vishnu
                   aged about 12 years,
                   S/o late K V Ravi,

                   2 to 4 since minors
                   Represented by their
                   mother and natural guardian
                   Smt. Pushpalatha, the Appellant No.1.
                                -2-
                                          NC: 2024:KHC:31108-DB
                                           RFA No. 2238 of 2018




     All are residing at
     Kanajenahalli Village,
     Thippenahalli Post,
     Chikkaballapur Taluk and District
     Pin - 562 105.
                                                     ...Appellants
(By Sri. K.S.Uday, Advocate)

AND:

1.   M. Keshava Reddy
     Major in age
     S/o Late Mariyappa

2.   Sri M Ashwatha Reddy
     Major in Age
     S/o Late Mariyappa

     Both residing at
     Nugithahalli Village,
     Nandi Hobli
     Chikkaballapur Taluk & District
     Pin - 562 103.
                                                   ...Respondents
(By Sri. P.B.Ajit, Advocate)

       This RFA is filed under section 96 of CPC., against the
judgment    and    decree   dated    12.10.2018   passed   in   OS
No.139/2013 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM.,
at Chickballapur    partly decreeing the suit for recovery of
money.

       This Appeal, coming on for orders, this day, order was
made therein as under:
                             -3-
                                      NC: 2024:KHC:31108-DB
                                      RFA No. 2238 of 2018




CORAM:   HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR
         and
         HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA


                       ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR)

Appellants' counsel submits that on 08.07.2024 he

filed a memo seeking permission to withdraw the appeal in

view of settlement arrived at between the parties in the

execution proceedings. But the office has raised objection

on the memo for withdrawal pointing out that appellants

2,3 and 4 are minors and since they have attained

majority now, necessary application for discharge of the

guardian has to be filed.

2. Office objection is not tenable for the reason that

in the execution proceedings the matter is settled between

the parties. Learned counsel for the appellants produces

the certified copy of the order passed by the executing

court stating that the matter has been settled in the Lok

Adalath and the executing petition has been closed. If the

execution petition has been closed, the interest of the

minors will not get affected. In this view there is no

NC: 2024:KHC:31108-DB

impediment for accepting the memo filed by the

appellants. Office objection is over ruled. Memo for

withdrawal is placed on record. Appeal is dismissed as

withdrawn. Since the matter is settled in the Lok Adalath,

entire court fee paid in this appeal shall be refunded to the

appellants. Respondents' counsel is present.

Sd/-

(SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR) JUDGE

Sd/-

(UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE

sd