In a regular first appeal filed under Section 96 of the CPC, the appellant applied to withdraw the appeal as not pressed due to a subsequent government order. The court accepted the request and disposed of the appeal by recording it as withdrawn.
The appeal was disposed of as withdrawn.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2012
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.1359/2011
BETWEEN:
SMT RATHNAMMA, W/O. MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, NO. 5, BOVI COLONY, KADABESSANAHALLI, VARTHUR HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, BANGALORE – 560 076
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI S.V. BHAT, ADV.)
AND:
... RESPONDENTS
2
THIS RFA IS FILED U/SEC.96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED: 01.04.2011 PASSED IN O.S.7662/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR THE DECLARATION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION.
THIS RFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo
dated 20.06.2012, which reads as under:
“The appellant in the above appeal prays this Hon’ble Court may be please to permit the appellant to withdraw the above appeal as not pressed, in view of the subsequent order passed by the Government, in the interest of the justice.”
withdrawn.
Sd/JUDGE
ST*
SMT RATHNAMMA, W/O. MUNIYAPPA
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DISTRICT
THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE EAST TALUK
A.S. BOPANNA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
