Sri Mohammed Ibrahim v. Sri S a Mujeep
Case brief
What is this about?
2023:KHC:38393 RFA No. 559 of 2015 IN THE…
2023:KHC:38393 RFA No. 559 of 2015 IN THE…
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.
NC: 2023:KHC:38393 RFA No. 559 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 559 OF 2015 (MON)
BETWEEN:
SRI. MOHAMMED IBRAHIM, S/O LATE ABDUL RAWOOF, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT NO.16, BATCHAMMAL ROAD, TUSKAN ELEGANT APARTMENTS, COX TOWN,
BANGALORE - 560 005.
…APPELLANT
(BY SMT. BHARATHI PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. KARISHMA NAGHNOOR AND SRI. RAHUL CARIAPPA, ADVOCATES)
AND:
Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SRI. S.A. MUJEEP, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, S/O LATE SYED AHMED, R/AT NO.37/6, CUNNINGHAM ROAD CROSS, AGARWAL LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 052.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. M. NAGENDRASWAMY AND SRI. S.A. MUJEEB, ADVOCATES FOR C/R)
THIS RFA IS FILED U/O XLI RULE 1 & 2 R/W SEC. 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
16.01.2015 PASSED IN OS NO.2992/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH 14), PARTLY DECREED THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
It is submitted that the appellant, who is the
defendant, died about 2 years earlier and the exact date of death is not known to learned counsel for the appellant. It is also submitted that the respondent/plaintiff is also no more.
the respondent/plaintiff. Accordingly, by operation of law,
the appeal stands dismissed as abated.
Sd/JUDGE
KTY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9 CT:SNN
Sri. Mohammed Ibrahim
Sri. S.A. Mujeeb
V Srishananda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court