Dismissed

Shri.Umesh S/O Hanamamtappa Huchhadi @ Nadagouda v. Gangavva W/O Sakareppa Huchhadi

Karnataka HC2 Sept 2021WP/102737/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking to quash a compromise decree in a civil suit. The Court held that an alternative remedy is available to the filing party. Only remedies available to the party were outlined. No substantive opinion is given. The matter is disposed of.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the trial court for ventilating their grievance.

Shri.Umesh S/O Hanamamtappa Huchhadi @… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR

¶6

W.P. No. 102737/2019 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHRI UMESH S/O HANAMANTAPPA HUCHHADI @ NADAGOUDA, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE/ HOUSEHOLD, R/O KALLIGUDDI, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶9

SMT. LAXMAVVA W/O HANAMANTAPPA HUCHHADI @ NADAGOUDA, AGE: 69 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE/ HOUSEHOLD, R/O KALLIGUDDI, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶10

PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SRI M.C. HUKKERI, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

GANGAVVA W/O SAKAREPPA HUCHHADI, AGE: 72 YEARS, OCC.: AGRICULTURE, R/O KALLIGUDDI, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶14

LAXMAVVA W/O LAXMAN SIDDANNAVAR, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC.: AGRICULTURE, R/O MADAMGERI, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶15

GOUDAPPA S/O SAKREPPA HUCHHADI, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC.: AGRICULTURE, R/O KALLIGUDDI, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶16

KALLAVVA W/O MAHADEV KHOTI, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC.: AGRICULTURE, R/O MALALI, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶17

RAMAVVA W/O MUTTEPPA TIMMAVVAGOL, AGE: 44 YEARS,OCC.: AGRI & HOUSEHOLD,

¶18

¶19

R/O NINGAPUR, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶20

ADIVEVVA W/O PANDU BILAKANCHI, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC.: AGRI & HOUSEHOLD, R/O MALDHOR, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶21

RAMESH S/O LAXMAN SIDDANNAVAR, AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC.: AGRICULTURE, R/O MADAMAGERI, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶22

SIDDAPPA S/O MAHADEV KHOTI, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC.: STUDENT, R/O MALALI, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶23

RAMESH S/O MAHADEV KHOTI, AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC.: STUDENT, R/O MALALI, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT SINCE DEFENDANT NO.9 IS MINOR R/BY HIS M/G NATURAL MOTHER DEFENDANT NO.4 KALLAVVA W/O MAHADEV KHOTI.

¶24

MALLAPPA S/O MAHADEV KHOTI, AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC.: STUDENT, R/O MALALI, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶25

VARSIDDA S/O MUTTEPPA TIMMAVVAGOL, AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC.: STUDENT, R/O NINGAPUR, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶26

RAMESH S/O MUTTEPPA TIMMAVVAGOL, AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC.: STUDENT, R/O NINGAPUR, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶27

LAXMAN S/O MUTTEPPA TIMMAVVAGOL, AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC.: STUDENT, R/O NINGAPUR, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶28

DYAMANNA S/O PANDU BILAKANCHI, AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC.: STUDENT, R/O MADAWAL, TQ: SAVADATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI SINCE DEFENDANT NO.14 IS MINOR R/BY HIS M/G NATURAL MOTHER DEFENDANT NO.6 ADIVEVVA W/O PANDU BILAKANCHI.

¶29

RESPONDENTS

¶30

¶31

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED COMPROMISE DECREE PASSED IN O.S. NO. 388/2015 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE, GOKAK DATED 30.07.2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-D & ETC.

¶32

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

¶33

ORDER

¶34

In this writ petition, the petitioners have sought for

¶35

the following reliefs.

¶36

Quash the impugned compromise decree passed in O.S. No. 388/2015 by the Court of IInd Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Gokak, at Gokak dated 30.07.2016 vide Annexure-D and remand the matter for fresh disposal in accordance with law and for other reliefs.

¶37

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused

¶38

the material on record including the impugned compromise decree dated 30.07.2016 passed in O.S. No. 388/2015.

¶39

Though several contentions have been urged by the petitioners in the present writ petition, having regard to the fact that equally efficacious and alternative remedy by way of approaching the trial Court is available to the petitioner, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the

¶40

¶41

contentions urged by the petitioners, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this writ petition reserving liberty in favour of the petitioners to take recourse to such remedies as available in law including approaching the trial Court for ventilating their grievance in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.

¶42

Subject to the aforesaid directions and liberty reserved in favour of the petitioners, petition stands disposed of.

¶43

Sd/JUDGE

¶44

bvv

Shri.Umesh S/O Hanamamtappa Huchhadi @ Nadagouda v. Gangavva W/O Sakareppa Huchhadi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri.Umesh S/O Hanamamtappa Huchhadi @ Nadagouda v. Gangavva W/O Sakareppa Huchhadi

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

Shri. Somappa S/O Shivappa Hosamani Vs the State of Karnataka

Shankar Dolla Gunagi Vs Mangala Ekanath Gunagi

Hanumanthappa S/O.Ningappa Talawar @ Walikar Vs the State of Karnataka

Mahadevappa S/O Sankappa Benni Vs Smt.Gouradevi W/O. Basavaraj Manvi.

Gurudas Venkatraman Markande Vs Lalita W/O. Gangapati Bhat Kurse

Kamalakar Beerappa Naik Vs Smt.Laxmi Kom. Keriyappa Naik