Karnataka High Court
Sri Chikkamuni Nanjappa vs Sri Appanna S/O Munishamappa on 2 July, 2024
Author: V Srishananda
Bench: V Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:24894
RSA No. 2642 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.2642 OF 2010 (INJ)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI CHIKKAMUNI NANJAPPA
S/O MUNIYAPPA
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS
1(a) SRI. H M NARAYANASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
1(b) SRI. H M NAGARAJ
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
1(c) SRI. H M RAMANJANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
Digitally
signed by R 1(d) SRI. H M RAMESH
MANJUNATHA
Location:
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA 1(e) H C BALAKRISHNA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
1(f) H C LOKESH
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
NO.1(a) to (e) ARE
SONS OF LATE CHIKKAMUNI NANJAPPA
RESIDING AT HANCHARAHALLI VILLAGE,
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:24894
RSA No. 2642 of 2010
BANGALORE-49
2. SRI. RAMAIAH
S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
3. SRI. MUNIVENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA
4. SRI. ANJINAPPA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA
5. SRI. H M VENKATESH
S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
NO.2 TO 5 ARE RESIDING AT
S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA
R/A HANCHARAHALLI VILLAGE
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
BANGALORE-49
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI S VISWESWARAIAH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI APPANNA
S/O MUNISHAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
2. SRI. MUNEGOWDA
S/O APPANNA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
3. SRI. NARAYANASWAMY
S/O APPANNA
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:24894
RSA No. 2642 of 2010
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
4. SRI. JAYENDRA
S/O APPANNA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
5. SRI. MAHADEVA
S/O APPANNA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
6. SRI. SUBRAMANI
S/O APPANNA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
7. SRI. GOPALA @ GOPI
S/O APPANNA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
8. SRI. NANDEESHA
S/O APPANNA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
9. SRI. DEVARAKONDAPPA
S/O KONDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
10. SRI SUBRAMANI
S/O RAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
11. SRI. NARASIMHAPPA
S/O NOT KNOWN
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
12. SRI. KADIRAPPA
S/O NOT KNOWN
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:24894
RSA No. 2642 of 2010
13. SRI. SONNAPPA
S/O LATE DODDAMUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF
HANCHARAHALLI VILLAGE
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
BANGALORE-49
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI G B MANJUNATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R6 AND
R8;
R7, R10, R13 ARE SERVED;
VIDE ORDER DATED 06.11.2015, APPEAL DISMISSED
AGAINST R1 AND R9;
VIDE ORDER DATED 24.01.2019, R11 AND R12 ARE
DELETED)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.6.2010 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.84/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER,
FAST TRACK COURT-V, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT,
BANGALORE, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.4.2008 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.362/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. II CIVIL
JUDGE (JR.DN) BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:24894
RSA No. 2642 of 2010
ORDER
Learned counsel for the appellants has filed a memo.
Memo reads as under:
"The appellants seek leave of this Hon'ble Court to
withdraw the suit in O.S.No.362/2002 filed against the
respondents for the relief of perpetual injunction before
the Hon'ble II Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn), Bengaluru
Rural District with a liberty to file a suit for declaration of
title and for other consequential reliefs in respect of the
suit schedule property on the same cause of action.
Accordingly, the Appellants pray for withdrawal of the
above Appeal in the interest of justice and equity."
In view of the memo, appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
However, no liberty can be granted by this Court, as it is
a memo simpliciter filed by the appellants.
However, dismissal of the second appeal shall not come
in the way of appellants, working out his remedy before the
appropriate Forum in accordance with law and this observation
shall not be construed as deemed liberty.
Sd/-
JUDGE
