The High Court of Karnataka held that the miscellaneous first appeals became infructuous because the underlying original suit was disposed of while the appeals were pending, dismissing them accordingly while reserving liberty.
Appeals dismissed as infructuous on the ground that the underlying suit was disposed of.
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 BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5078 OF 2019 (CPC)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5082 OF 2019 (CPC)
IN MFA NO.5078/2019
BETWEEN:
2
R/AT NO.672, 8TH CROSS, 2ND BLOCK, 9TH MAIN, HBR LAYOUT, BENGALURU – 560 084.
... APPELLANTS
[BY SRI. VIJAYA KRISHNA BHAT, ADVOCATE]
AND:
3
BENGALURU – 560 010.
… RESPONDENTS
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 06.06.2019 PASSED ON I.A.NO.12 IN O.S.NO.5312/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE XXIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-30), DISMISSING IA NO.12 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
IN MFA NO.5082/2019
BETWEEN:
4
2ND BLOCK, 9TH MAIN, HBR LAYOUT, BENGALURU – 560 084.
... APPELLANTS
[BY SRI. VIJAYA KRISHNA BHAT, ADVOCATE]
AND:
5
… RESPONDENTS
[BY SRIT.H.NARAYANA, ADVOCATE FOR R-3; SRI.JAGADEESH P. ,ADVOCATE FOR R-5]
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 06.06.2019 PASSED ON I.A.NO.12 IN O.S.NO.5312/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE XXIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-30), DISMISSING IA NO.12 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T
Learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 submitted that the suit in O.S. No. 5312/2005 on the file of XXIX Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-30)from which the present appeal arises was disposed on 06.07.2020 and therefore these appeals have become infructuous. Learned counsel has placed on record the certified copy of the Judgment and
Decree passed in O.S. No. 5312/2005.
6
considering these appeals which arise out of an Order passed on IA No. 12 in O.S. No. 5312/2005 would not arise. Hence, this appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous.
to seek necessary relief, if any appeal that may be filed by the plaintiff against the Judgment and Decree passed
in O.S. No. 5312/2005 on the file of XXIX Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-30).
Sd/- ( JUDGE)
mbb
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the miscellaneous first appeals filed under Section 43 Rule 1(r) of CPC have become infructuous as the underlying suit was disposed of after the order appealed against.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Vijaya Laxmi and others
Smt. S.Vasanth and others
Nataraj Rangaswamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
