Dismissed

Shantaram S/O. Yashawant Nandodkar v. Laxman S/O. Ravalu Nandodkar

Karnataka HC6 Jan 2021RSA/5432/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an appeal under Section 100 of CPC as abated. The appeal was filed against an interim decree and the original decree. The court noted the first respondent (plaintiff in suit) was deceased and his legal representatives were not brought on record, causing the appeal to abate. Since the suit was decreed jointly, the entire appeal was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as abated due to failure to bring deceased respondent's legal representatives on record.

Shantaram S/O. Yashawant Nandodkar Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 06^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI

¶5

R.S.A. No.5432/2013 (INJ)

¶6

BETWEEN

¶7

SHANTARAM S/O. YASHAWANT NANDODKAR AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BALOGA, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELGAUM 590001.

¶8

...APPELLANT

¶9

(By Sri.RAJENDRA R. PATIL, ADV.)

¶10

AND

¶11

1 . LAXMAN S/O. RAVALU NANDODKAR AGE: 84 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BALOGA, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELGAUM 590001.

¶12

2 . MAHADEV S/O. RAVALU NANDODKAR AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BALOGA, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELGAUM 590001.

¶13

3 . RAMU S/O. RAVALU NANDODKAR

¶14

¶15

AGE: 74 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BALOGA, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELGAUM 590001.

¶16

….RESPONDENTS

¶17

(APPEAL ABATED AGAINST R1; R2 AND R3 ARE SERVED)

¶18

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.02.2013 PASSED IN R.A.NO.14/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KHANAPUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL, FILED AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 02.06.2009 AND THE DECREE PASSED IN O.S.NO.85/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KHANAPUR, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND MANDATORY INJUNCTION.

¶19

THIS RSA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Notice issue to respondent No.1 has returned with

¶22

endorsement that respondent No.1 is dead. On 04.11.2015, time has been granted to the appellant to take steps for bringing the legal representatives on record. Though the matter is listed before this Court on innumerable occasion, needful has not been done.

¶23

Today the counsel reports that there is no instructions from the appellant and appropriate orders may be passed.

¶24

¶25

It is seen that respondent No.1 in this appeal was plaintiff No.1. Relief sought in the suit was for mandatory injunction and possession. The appeal is dismissed as abated against respondent No.1 for failure to bring the legal representatives of deceased-respondent No.1 on record. As per the judgment passed by the Appellate Court, suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiffs jointly and not individually, the entire appeal is liable to be dismissed.

¶26

In view of the above, appeal is dismissed.

¶27

Sd/JUDGE

¶28

KGK

Shantaram S/O. Yashawant Nandodkar v. Laxman S/O. Ravalu Nandodkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shantaram S/O. Yashawant Nandodkar v. Laxman S/O. Ravalu Nandodkar

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

S. Ramesh S/O. S Vittal Rao Vs Smt.R. Pushpalata W/O. R Rajendra

State of Karnataka Vs Lingaraj S/O Shivappa Banakar

Shrinivas Narayan Pal Vs Subhadhar Narayan Shetty

The Director Vs T. Chidanandappa

Smt. Ratnavva W/O Vijaykumar Mahajan Vs Shri. Nandeppa Chanabasappa Myageri

The Divisional Manager, Vs Shevanta W/O Late Dinakar Barage