Dismissed

Smt M D Pushpa v. Shankar

Karnataka HC16 Dec 2021RFA/717/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge disposed of a Regular First Appeal filed under CPC against a dismissal of a suit for permanent injunction. The Court dismissed the appeal as not pressed upon appellant's counsel stating that deceased appellant's legal representatives were not interested in prosecuting the appeal.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed as not pressed because the legal representatives of the deceased appellant were not interested in prosecuting the appeal.

Smt M D Pushpa Vs Shankar — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY

¶5

R.F.A.No.717 OF 2016

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT.M.D.PUSHPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS W/O LATE SRINIVASMURTHY R/AT NO.6, 4^TH CROSS, AGRAHARA DASARAHALLI MAGADI ROAD, BANGALORE-560079 ..APPELLANT

¶8

(BY SRI SRINIVASAN K.R., ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

SHANKAR S/O LATE MUNISWAMY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

¶11

SHIVARAM S/O LATE MUNISWAMY AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS

¶12

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.50/1, 2^ND CROSS, 4^TH MAIN ROAD, AGRAHARA DASARAHALLI, MAGADI ROAD, BANGALORE -560 079

¶13

RFA No. 717/2016

¶14

¶15

3. COMMISSIONER OF BBMP NARASIMHARAJA SQUARE BANGALORE -560 002. ..RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI.T.PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2, SRI.ASHWIN S. HALADY, ADVOCATE FOR R-3

¶17

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER XLI RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE AGAINST THE DATED 08.01.2016 PASSED IN O.S.NO.7925/2010, ON THE FILE OF THE XVI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH NO.12), DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

¶18

This R.F.A. coming on for Orders, through Physical Hearing/Video Conferencing Hearing, this day, the Court made the following :

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Learned counsels from both side are physically present in the Court.

¶21

The office has raised an objection on the Memo dated 07.12.2021 filed by the appellant seeking withdrawal of this appeal as not pressed. The objection is that the alleged legal representatives of the deceased appellant have not been brought on record, still they have filed the Memo for withdrawal.

¶22

RFA No. 717/2016 3

¶23

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

¶24

since he is the counsel for the appellant and has signed to the Memo, the said Memo can be accepted ignoring the alleged signature of the legal representatives of the deceased appellant.

¶25

In view of the above submission of the learned

¶26

counsel for the appellant, the memo is taken up for consideration.

¶27

Since the learned counsel for the appellant has

¶28

submitted that the legal representatives of the deceased appellant are not interested in prosecuting the appeal, the Appeal stands dismissed as not pressed.

¶29

In view of the above, the Memo dated 05.08.2021 filed by the respondents does not survive for consideration.

¶30

Sd/JUDGE

¶31

MBB

Smt M D Pushpa v. Shankar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt M D Pushpa v. Shankar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Kanthilal Vs Sri P Prashanth

Smt. Mala Vs Smt. Devi

Sri. H. L. Srinivas Gupta Vs Smt. H. N. Deepthi

Smt Vijaya Vs Sri Sadashivaiah

R Chayadevi Vs Smt Padma Kishore

Mrs Kalpana Malla Vs Mrs Rathnamma