Dismissed

Smt Prabha Chandre Gowda v. Sri S Prakash

Karnataka HC21 Nov 2023CRP/696/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka, in a Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 CPC, held that the petition is not maintainable as its disposal would not result in the disposal of proceedings before the Trial Court. The Court dismissed the revision but reserved liberty to file a writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The revision petition was dismissed on the grounds of non-maintainability. Liberty was reserved to file a writ petition.

Smt Prabha Chandre Gowda Vs Sri S Prakash — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:41741 CRP No. 696 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 696 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. PRABHA CHANDRE GOWDA, W/O LATE B.C. CHANDREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS, R/O CHANNAPURA ROAD, KOTE, CHIKKAMAGALURU CITY - 577 101.

¶9

ALSO R/O NO.502, EMBASSY ORCHID APARTMENT, 8^TH MAIN ROAD, SADASHIVA NAGARA, BANGALORE - 560 080.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. MUJTABA H., ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AND:

¶14

SRI. S. PRAKASH, S/O LATE SUNKAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

¶15

SMT. J.B. RASHMI, W/O S. PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.

¶16

RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 ARE R/O MIG 8, 4TH PHASE, KHB EXTENSION,

¶17

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:41741 CRP No. 696 of 2023

¶18

JYOTHINAGARA, CHIKKAMAGALURU CITY - 577 101.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER 115 OF CPC., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.09.2023 PASSED IN C.MISC NO.37/2021 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., CHIKKAMAGALURU., DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 9 RULE 4 R/W SEC.151 OF CPC.

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This revision petition is filed challenging an order passed by the Trial Court under Order IX Rule 4 of CPC.

¶24

The registry has raised an objection regarding maintainability of the revision petition. In view of the fact that disposal of this revision petition does not result in disposal of the proceedings before the Trial Court, this revision petition is not maintainable and therefore, the office objection raised regarding the maintainability is up held.

¶25

¶26

NC: 2023:KHC:41741 CRP No. 696 of 2023

¶27

In that view of the matter this revision petition

¶28

is dismissed.

¶29

However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to

¶30

file appropriate writ petition challenging the impugned order in accordance with law.

¶31

Office is directed to return the certified copy of

¶32

the impugned order after retaining a photo copy.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

KBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7 CT:SNN

Smt Prabha Chandre Gowda v. Sri S Prakash

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Prabha Chandre Gowda v. Sri S Prakash

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

Smt. Rathnamma Vs the Range Forest Officer

Sri.Krishnaprasad.v Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Krishnaprasad v Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Sakhi Bai Vs Sri Prakash

Sri. Lakshman Naik, Vs Smt. Divya

Shri S Rajagopala Reddy Vs Smt Aswatha