Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 27656 Kant
Judgement Date : 19 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:46663
RFA No. 1857 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1857 OF 2012 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
1. RUDRESH
S/O PUTTAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT NO.140, F ROAD,
1ST IDEAL HOMES TOWNSHIP,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 028.
2. KRISHNA S/O PUTTAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
3. DEVARAJU S/O PUTTAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
4. ASHOK S/O PUTTAPPA,
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF APPELLOANTS NO.2 TO 4 ARE
KARNATAKA
R/AT AVAREGERE VILLAGE, BIDADI HOBLI,
RAMANAGARAM TALUK AND DISTRICT-573 171.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. PRAKASH M.H., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. CHIKKAHOMBAMMA
W/O RAMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT SHETTIGOWDANADODDI,
BIDADI HOBLI,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:46663
RFA No. 1857 of 2012
RAMANAGARAM TALUK
AND DISTRICT-573171.
2. PUTTAPPA S/O LATE HANUMANTHAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS,
R/AT AVAREGERE VILLAGE,
BIDADI HOBLI,
RAMANAGARAM TALUK
AND DISTRICT-573 171.
3. SMT.GOWRAMMA W/O VENKATESH,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
17TH CROSS, PADARAYANAPURA,
BANGALORE-560 056.
4. SMT. UMA W/O MUNIRAJU,
AGE: MAJOR, R/AT NO.25,
1ST MAIN, DEEPANJALINAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 021.
5. SMT.SHANTHI W/O SHIVAKUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/AT ANDRAHALLI,
HEGGANAHALLI MAIN ROAD,
SUMANI FASHION OFFER SHED ROAD,
SHIRDI SAI BABA LAYOUT,
BANGALORE-560 012.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.L.SREENIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4;
VIDE ORDER DATED 04.01.2023,
COURT NOTICE ISSUED TO R1 AND SERVICE IS ACCEPTED)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.07.2012
PASSED IN O.S.321/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, RAMANAGARA, DECREEING THE SUIT
FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:46663
RFA No. 1857 of 2012
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the appellants has filed a memo
stating that already FDP proceedings has been closed and in
the FDP, petitioner has stated that she has executed a
relinquishment deed dated 07.01.2022 and she is not willing to
proceed with the matter and even respondent Nos.1 to 7 are
also not interested to proceed with the matter and Trial Court
taking note of the relinquishment deed executed, closed the
FDP proceedings.
2. In view of execution of relinquishment deed, this
appeal does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the
regular first appeal stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
ST
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!