In a miscellaneous first appeal filed under the Code of Civil Procedure, the appellant submitted that the parties had settled the matter. The court held that the appeal became infructuous due to the settlement and dismissed it.
The appeal was dismissed as infructuous. The incidental application was disposed of accordingly.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK.S.KINAGI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1373 OF 2018 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
M.R.KRISHNAPPA, S/O LATE RAMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO.88/6, 3RD CROSS, CHELKERE, KALYAN NAGAR, BANGALORE-560043.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI VINOD PRASAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
2
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G.S.BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R1)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.11.2017 PASSED ON IA NO.1 IN OS NO.926/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU RURAL, ALLOWING I.A.NO.1 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the appellant appearing
through video conferencing submits that the parties have settled the matter.
2. His submission is placed on record.
In view of the settlement between the parties,
the appeal does not survive for consideration.
3
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous.
In view of the disposal of the main appeal, I.A.No.1/2018 does not survive for consideration and disposed of accordingly.
Sd/JUDGE
ssb
2 provisions across 1 enactments
M.R. Krishnappa
Smt. Vimala G Nair
Sri B.C. Nanjunda Setty
Sri Gabriel
Ashok S. Kinagi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
