Sri Anjanappa v. Sri D L Ramanna
Case brief
What is this about?
This is an appeal under Section 96 read with Order 41 Rule 1 CPC. The court reported the death of the sole respondent and noted that no steps were taken to implead legal representatives, leading to dismissal due to abatement.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA
R.F.A.No.906/2012(INJ)
BETWEEN:
SRI.ANJANAPPA MAJOR IN AGE, S/O SRI.CHIKKASANJEEVAPPA SANJEEVAPPA BUILDING KANAKAPURA ROAD, KONANAKUNTE CROSS, BANGALORE -560 062 ..APPELLANT
(BY SRI.SUNIL NARAYAN NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.D.L.JAGADEESH AND ASSOCIATES)
AND:
SRI.D.L.RAMANNA MAJOR IN AGE S/O LATE LINGAIAH RESIDING AT NO.231, BLOCK-6 KHB APARTMENTS, HIG DN. 5TH STAGE NEW TOWN, YELAHANKA, BANGALORE -560 064. ..RESPONDENT
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.03.2012 PASSED IN O.S.No.9220/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE XLIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
Parties & counsel
- appellant
SRI.ANJANAPPA
- respondent
SRI.D.L.RAMANNA
Coram
V. SRISHANANDA
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Karnataka HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- RFA/906/2012
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court