Disposed

Karthikeyan Ganeshan v. Smt Sathya Geetha Rani

Karnataka HC6 Jan 2022MFA/2937/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment records that the Court disposed of a civil revision petition and a miscellaneous first appeal after parties admitted a compromise. The CRP was allowed in terms of the compromise decree, releasing funds from a court deposit. The appeal was dismissed as infructuous due to the settlement.

What did the court decide?

CRP No.296/2018 allowed; underlying suit withdrawn; MFA No.2937/2014 disposed of as infructuous.

Karthikeyan Ganeshan Vs Smt Sathya Geetha Rani — Execution and Attachment | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

CRP NO.296/2018 C/W MFA NO.2937/2014

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

¶7

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.296/2018 (IO) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2937/2014 (CPC)

¶8

In CRP No.296/2018

¶9

BETWEEN :

¶10

KARTHIKEYAN GANESHAN S/O LATE GANESHAN THANGAVELU AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT 6677 SUNNY DRIVE, MASON OHIO – 45040-1696 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

¶11

… PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI L.GOVINDRAJ, ADV.)

¶13

AND :

¶14

SATHYA GEETHA RANI W/O S.RAVISHANKAR AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT ANUGRAHA #99, 7^TH CROSS

¶15

BRINDAVAN LAYOUT HORAMAVU POST BANASAWADI

¶16

BANGALORE – 560 043

¶17

SUBHASHINI GANESHAN W/O MOHAN RAGHUPATHY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS REP. BY HER GPA HOLDER SATHYA GEETHA RANI W/O S.RAVISHANKAR ANUGRAHA

¶18

CRP NO.296/2018 C/W MFA NO.2937/2014

¶19

¶20

#99, 7^TH CROSS BRINDAVAN LAYOUT HORAMAVU POST BANASAWADI BANGALORE – 560 043

¶21

DEVI GANESHAN W/O SURESH BABU VIVEKANANDAN AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT 24/14 WEST PEAK ROAD PHOENIX-8385085 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

¶22

… RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI K.CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADV. FOR R1 & R2; SRI D.S.MANJEGOWDA, ADV. FOR R3)

¶24

THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 04.04.2018 PASSED ON I.A. IN O.S.NO.8563/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CITY CIVIL COURT, BANGALORE, DISMISSING THE I.A. FILED UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11(d) OF CPC FOR REJECTION OF THE PLAINT.

¶25

In MFA No.2937/2014

¶26

BETWEEN :

¶27

KARTHIKEYAN GANESHAN S/O LATE GANESHAN THANGAVELU AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT 6677 SUNNY DRIVE, MASON OHIO – 45040-1696 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

¶28

AND ALSO AT NO.21, THAMBUCHETTY ROAD COXTOWN, BANGALORE

¶29

… APPELLANT

¶30

(BY SRI L.GOVINDRAJ, ADV.)

¶31

AND :

¶32

SMT. SATHYA GEETHA RANI W/O S.RAVISHANKAR

¶33

CRP NO.296/2018 C/W MFA NO.2937/2014

¶34

¶35

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT ANUGRAHA #99, 7^TH CROSS BRINDAVAN LAYOUT HORAMAVU POST BANASAWADI BANGALORE – 560 043

¶36

SMT. SUBHASHINI GANESHAN W/O MOHAN RAGHUPATHY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS REP. BY HER GPA HOLDER SATHYA GEETHA RANI W/O S.RAVISHANKAR ANUGRAHA #99, 7^TH CROSS BRINDAVAN LAYOUT HORAMAVU POST BANASAWADI BANGALORE – 560 043

¶37

SMT. DEVI GANESHAN W/O SURESH BABU VIVEKANANDAN AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT 24/14 WEST PEAK ROAD PHOENIX-8385085 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

¶38

… RESPONDENTS

¶39

(BY SRI K.CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADV. FOR C/R1 & R2; SRI G.PRASHANTH, ADV. FOR R3)

¶40

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.02.2014 PASSED ON IA NO.1 IN OS NO.8563/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE XV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE, ALLOWING I.A.NO.1 FILED U/O 39 RULE 1 & 2 R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC.

¶41

THESE PETITION AND APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶42

CRP NO.296/2018 C/W MFA NO.2937/2014

¶43

¶44

ORDER

¶45

In CRP No.296/2018

¶46

The petitioner, respondent Nos.1 and 2, husband of respondent No.1 and the respective counsel are present virtually before the Court. The parties are duly identified by their counsel. So far as respondent No.3, she was defendant No.2 before the trial Court. It is submitted that she is sailing with the petitioner.

¶47

The parties admit the voluntary execution of

¶48

the compromise petition. The same is found admissible in law. Therefore, the compromise is recorded.

¶49

The petition is allowed in terms of the compromise petition. Draw decree accordingly.

¶50

Out of Rs.44,00,000/- deposited before this Court, Registry shall release Rs.22,00,000/- to respondent Nos.1 and 2 each.

¶51

It is submitted that respondent No.2 is a Non Resident citizen of India, therefore, she does not hold Aadhaar Card. Registry shall disburse the amount to

¶52

CRP NO.296/2018 C/W MFA NO.2937/2014

¶53

¶54

her on furnishing any other identity proof like PAN Card and the Bank details.

¶55

Respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall withdraw

¶56

O.S.No.8563/2013 filed before the trial Court.

¶57

Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶58

In MFA No.2937/2014

¶59

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed memo reporting that in view of the settlement of the matter between the parties which is recorded in CRP No.296/2018, this appeal has become infructuous.

¶60

Recording the memo, the appeal is disposed of accordingly.

¶61

Sd/JUDGE

¶62

pgg

Karthikeyan Ganeshan v. Smt Sathya Geetha Rani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karthikeyan Ganeshan v. Smt Sathya Geetha Rani

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

Mukunda Vs the State by Metagalli Police

Mr.Muneendra Vs State of Karnataka

Sri S Lokesh Vs Sri M Rajagopal

Mrs. Arlene Pinto Vs Mr Sunil Joseph Pinto

Smt. Pushpa. G Vs Mr. Krishnan. N. S.

Karthikeyan Ganeshan Vs Sathya Geetha Rani