Dismissed

Smt. P.N Sunitha v. Sri. Nallurashetty

Karnataka HC13 Dec 2022RFA/1716/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the regular first appeal filed under Section 96 of CPC. The appellant filed a memo withdrawing the appeal voluntarily, acknowledging the court's lack of jurisdiction due to valuation limits. The court ordered the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn; Registry directed to return certified copies.

Smt. P.N Sunitha Vs Sri. Nallurashetty — Partition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

RFA No. 1716 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1716 OF 2022 (PAR/DEC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. P.N. SUNITHA, W/O B.K.SURESH,

¶9

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O BALADARE VILLAGE, DANDIGANAHALLI HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 201.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI GIRISH B BALADARE., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SRI. NALLURASHETTY, S/O KALASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,

¶14

Digitally signed by GURURAJ D Location: High Court Of Karnataka

¶15

SMT.PADMAMMA, W/O NALLURASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,

¶16

SRI. P.N. VENKATESH, S/O NALLURASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,

¶17

SRI. P.N.SANTHOSH, S/O NALLURASHETTY,

¶18

2 - RFA No. 1716 of 2022

¶19

AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,

¶20

SMT. P.N.MEENAKSHI, W/O NALLURASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,

¶21

SRI. P.C.MANJUNATH, S/O CHIKKEGOWDA, DEAD BY LRS 6. PALLAVI, W/O RAVIKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/O VALAGERE SOMMNAHALLI VILLAGE, NUGGEHALLI HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201.

¶22

POOJA, D/O LATE MANJUNATHA P.C., AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/O PDUVANAHALLY DANDIGANAHALLI HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT.

¶23

SMT. Y.M.MAMATHA, W/O P.C.MANJUNATH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, ALL ARE R/O PADUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, DANDIGANAHALLI HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 201.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.10.2019 PASSED IN O.S.NO.78/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR

¶26

¶27

RFA No. 1716 of 2022

¶28

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHANNARAYAPATNA, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND DECLARATION.

¶29

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE

¶30

COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

Learned counsel for appellant has filed a memo dated 05.12.2022 and seeking dismissal of appeal for reasons stated therein, which reads as under:-

¶33

"Counsel appearing for appellant most respectfully submits that, the suit in respect of Item no.3 is decreed with respect to Item No.1 and 2 came to dismissed, against which appellant preferred the present appeal, now it came to know that, the suit Item no.1 valued Rs.12,00,000/- and relief is already granted by the trial Court with respect to Item no.1 of the schedule property, now the remaining properties of the schedule are not exceeding Rs.10,00,000/-. Hence, this Court have no jurisdiction to take up the above appeal because subject matter of the appeal is not exceeding Rs.10,00,000/- in view of the above facts the appellant is permitted to withdraw the above appeal as not pressed with availing the benefit to the appellant as provided under Section 14 of the Limitation Act in the interest of justice and equity."

¶34

In view of memo, appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶35

If appeal is filed before appropriate Court on or before

¶36

09.01.2023, appellant would be entitled to seek benefit under Section 14 of Limitation Act.

¶37

¶38

RFA No. 1716 of 2022

¶39

Registry is directed to return certified copies to learned

¶40

counsel for appellant by replacing same with photostat copies.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

MKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14

Smt. P.N Sunitha v. Sri. Nallurashetty

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. P.N Sunitha v. Sri. Nallurashetty

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

A Abdul Raffeekh Vs Sri Manjunath N

Sri N M Basappa Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Smt.Manohara Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Padmavathi a Vs Smt G Lakshmi Devi

Sri. K Balasubramani Vs Sri. Bheemashen Kamble

K.Sainath Reddy Vs Jayalakshmi