Allowed

Sri M R R Setty v. Smt Pushpavathi

Karnataka HC26 May 2023RFA/311/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court discharged the regular first appeal where the appellants undertook to vacate the suit premises by December 2023. The decree was modified to enforce this undertaking, liberty was reserved for execution upon default, and an enquiry into mesne profits was directed.

What did the court decide?

The appellants must quit and deliver vacant possession of the suit premises by the end of December 2023. Liberty reserved for respondents to execute decree in case of default. Enquiry into mesne profi

Sri M R R Setty Vs Smt Pushpavathi — Specific Performance | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

RFA No. 311 of 2006

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF MAY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶7

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 311 OF 2006 (RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI M R R SETTY

¶10

S/O LATE M V RAMASUBBA SETTY AGED 65 YEARS PROPRIETOR M/S GOKUL DAIRY FARM.

¶11

M/S GOKUL DAIRY FARM REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI M.R.R SETTY NO.1 & 2 R/AT NO.125 4TH CROSS,GANDHINAGAR BANGALORE 9.

¶12

…APPELLANTS

¶13

(BY SRI. L S VENKATAKRISHNA., ADVOCATE)

¶14

Digitally signed by DHANALAKSHMI MURTHY Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

AND:

¶16

SMT PUSHPAVATHI W/O LATE S R SADASHIVA AGED 48 YEARS.

¶17

MISS S MINAKSHI D/O LATE S. R. SADASHIVA AGED 27 YEARS

¶18

MISS S RUPA D/O LATE S. R. SADASHIVA AGED 23 YEARS.

¶19

¶20

RFA No. 311 of 2006

¶21

SRI S RUDRESH AGED 21 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.158 15TH MAIN,BSK., 1ST STAGE 2ND BLOCK, BANGALORE-560050.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. D.R. SUNDARESHA., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4[ABSENT])

¶24

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 1 R/W SEC.96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.12.05 PASSED IN O.S. NO.869/2004 ON THE FILE OF XXV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY (CCH NO.23) DECREEING THE SUIT FOR POSSESSION, ENQUIRY INTO MESNE PROFITS INRESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PREMISES.

¶25

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

The learned counsel for the appellants has filed a memo dated 26.5.2023 undertaking that the appellant shall vacate the suit schedule premises by the end of December 2023.

¶28

The memo signed by the learned counsel for

¶29

the appellants and appellant No.1 is placed on record.

¶30

¶31

RFA No. 311 of 2006

¶32

On 28.2.2006, the learned counsel for the

¶33

respondents undertook that the order will not be executed till the next date of hearing. On 5.6.2006, the interim order was extended till further orders. The said interim order is operating till date.

¶34

Heard the learned counsel for the appellants. None appears for the respondents.

¶35

In view of the memo filed by the learned counsel for the appellants and in view of the interim order granted by this Court and in the interest of justice, the appeal is disposed of.

¶36

The judgment and decree dated 22.12.2005 passed by the XXV Add. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore in O.S.No.869/2004 is modified.

¶37

The defendants-appellants shall quit and deliver the vacant possession of the suit schedule premises in favour of the plaintiffs by the end of December 2023.

¶38

¶39

RFA No. 311 of 2006

¶40

In case, the defendants-appellants fail to vacate the

¶41

suit schedule premises as undertaken, liberty is reserved

¶42

to the plaintiffs-respondents to execute the decree.

¶43

There shall be an enquiry into the mesne profits under Order 22 Rule 12 of CPC.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

¶46

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41

Sri M R R Setty v. Smt Pushpavathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri M R R Setty v. Smt Pushpavathi

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

Sakamma Vs the Oriental Insurance Company Limited

Sri R Chaluve Gowda Vs Sri G Rangaiah Since Dead by Lrs

The Bangalore Development Authority Vs Sri Jawaharlal

Dr.J.L.E. Saldanha Vs Sri Y.V. Venugopala Reddy Since

P C Balachandran Vs Jagan Chandy S/O Late C Chandy

Smt. Sundaramma Vs Sri. Kadari Subbarao Sudeendra Theertha Koushik