Partly allowed

Smt Nagamma v. H C Puttaswamy

Karnataka HC4 Oct 2023RFA/814/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-bench High Court allowed applications filed by appellants under Order XXI Rule 1 of CPC to permit withdrawal of suits. The suits were dismissed on technical grounds. Consequently, appeals were dismissed as they became infructuous. The Court made it clear that it did not express an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applications under Order XXI Rule 1 of CPC allowed to permit withdrawal of suits with liberty to file fresh suit on same cause of action; appeals dismissed as infructuous.

Smt Nagamma Vs H C Puttaswamy — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

NC: 2023:KHC:36186 RFA No. 2481 of 2007 C/W RFA No. 814 of 2007 RFA No. 815 of 2007 RFA No. 816 of 2007

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

¶7

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2481 OF 2007 (DEC)

¶8

C/W

¶9

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 814 OF 2007 REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 815 OF 2007 REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 816 OF 2007

¶10

IN RFA NO.2481/2007

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

K.C. CHANDRAKALA, W/O DEVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, NO.B 204, ISRO, QUARTERS, VIJAYNAGAR II STAGE, RPC LAYOUT I MAIN, NEAR VIJAYANAGAR CLUB, BANGALORE - 560 040.

¶14

(BY SRI.A.NAGARAJAPPA AND SRI.J.N.NAVEEN, ADVOCATES)

¶15

.…APPELLANT

¶16

AND:

¶17

SMT.NAGAMMA, W/O GANGANAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,

¶18

NC: 2023:KHC:36186 RFA No. 2481 of 2007 C/W RFA No. 814 of 2007 RFA No. 815 of 2007 RFA No. 816 of 2007

¶19

¶20

SRI.GANGANAGAIAH, S/O LATE CHENAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS.

¶21

2(A). SMT. UMA, D/O LATE GANGANAGAIAH, W/O NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, NO.141/142, SRINIDHI LAYOUT, 7TH CROSS, 35TH MAIN ROAD, NANDINI LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 096.

¶22

2(B). KANTHRAJ, S/O LATE GANGANAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, NO.38/B, 6TH CROSS, JAI MARUTHINAGAR, NANDINI LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 096.

¶23

RAJA, S/O GANGANAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS.

¶24

RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 3 ARE RESIDING AT NO.38/B, 6TH CROSS, JAI MARUTHINAGAR, NANDINI LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 096.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI.JOSE SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2(A AND B) AND R3)

¶27

NC: 2023:KHC:36186 RFA No. 2481 of 2007 C/W RFA No. 814 of 2007 RFA No. 815 of 2007 RFA No. 816 of 2007

¶28

¶29

THIS RFA IS FILED U/S.96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:20.1.2007 PASSED IN OS.NO. 5184/1999 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDL.CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE, CCH.NO.19, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND PERMANENT INJUNCITON.

¶30

IN RFA NO.814/2007

¶31

BETWEEN:

¶32

SMT.NAGAMMA, W/O GANGANAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS. NO.44, 7TH CROSS, JAIMARUTHINAGAR, JARAKBANDE KAVAL, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 086.

¶33

.…APPELLANT

¶34

(BY M/S. JOSE SEBASTIAN AND ASSOCIATES AND SRI.N.SREENIVASAMURTHY, ADVOCATE)

¶35

AND:

¶36

H.C. PUTTASWAMY, S/O CHNNAPPA, MAJOR, RESIDING AT NO.35, LAKSHMINARAYANAPURAM, SRI RAMAPURAM, BANGALORE - 560 021.

¶37

SRI. LAKKAPPA, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, MAJOR, RESIDING AT

¶38

NC: 2023:KHC:36186 RFA No. 2481 of 2007 C/W RFA No. 814 of 2007 RFA No. 815 of 2007 RFA No. 816 of 2007

¶39

¶40

DEENABHANDUNAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 021.

¶41

SMT. K.C. CHANDRAKALA, W/O DEVARAJ, MAJOR, NO.23, MARUTHINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 021.

¶42

…RESPONDENTS

¶43

(BY SRI.RAJANNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI.A.NAGARAJAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R3; VIDE ORDER DATED 08.09.2023 APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS AGAINST R2)

¶44

THIS RFA IS FILED U/S.96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:20.01.2007 PASSED IN OS.NO. 878/1994 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDL.CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE, CCH.NO.19, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCITON.

¶45

IN RFA NO.815/2007

¶46

BETWEEN:

¶47

SMT.NAGAMMA, W/O GANGANAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.44, 7^TH CROSS, JAIMARUTHINAGAR, NANDINI LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 096.

¶48

.…APPELLANT

¶49

(BY M/S. JOSE SABASTIAN AND ASSOCIATES., ADVOCATES)

¶50

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:36186 RFA No. 2481 of 2007 C/W RFA No. 814 of 2007 RFA No. 815 of 2007 RFA No. 816 of 2007

¶51

AND:

¶52

SMT.K.C.CHANDRAKALA, W/O DEVARAJ, MAJOR, NO.8204, ISRO QUARTERS, I MAIN, RPC LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR II STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 040.

¶53

…RESPONDENT

¶54

(BY SRI. A. NAGARAJAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶55

THIS RFA IS FILED U/S.96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:20.01.2007 PASSED IN OS.NO. 5766/1999 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDL.CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE, CCH.NO.19, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCITON.

¶56

IN RFA NO.816/2007

¶57

BETWEEN:

¶58

SMT.NAGAMMA, W/O GANGANAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.44, 7^TH CROSS, JAIMARUTHINAGAR, NANDINI LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 096.

¶59

…APPELLANT

¶60

(BY M/S. JOSE SEBASTIAN AND ASSOCIATES, ADVOCATES)

¶61

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:36186 RFA No. 2481 of 2007 C/W RFA No. 814 of 2007 RFA No. 815 of 2007 RFA No. 816 of 2007

¶62

AND:

¶63

M/S. JAIMARUTHINAGAR, WELFARE ASSOCIATION, (REGD), JARAKABANDE - KAVAL, YESHWANTHAPUR, BANGALORE - 560 022.

¶64

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, M.SEETHARAM.

¶65

K.C. CHANDRAKALA, W/O DEVARAJ, MAJOR, 82/4, ISRO QUARTERS, R.P.C. LAYOUT, VIJAYNAGAR II STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 040.

¶66

…RESPONDENTS

¶67

(R1 AND R2 SERVED)

¶68

THIS RFA IS FILED U/S.96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:20.01.2007 PASSED IN OS.NO.2574/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDL.CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE, CCH.NO.19, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND PERMANENT INJUNCITON.

¶69

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶70

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:36186 RFA No. 2481 of 2007 C/W RFA No. 814 of 2007 RFA No. 815 of 2007 RFA No. 816 of 2007

¶71

JUDGMENT

¶72

Applications under Order XXIII Rule 1 of CPC are

¶73

filed by the appellants in all these cases. Contesting respondents in all the appeals have been served with the copy of applications.

¶74

Taking note of the contents of the affidavit, in support of all the applications filed in all these appeals, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applications needs to be allowed, as the suits are to fail on technical grounds.

¶75

Accordingly, applications are allowed,

¶76

consequently, the suit of which the present appeal has been filed is permitted to be withdrawn by the plaintiffs with liberty to file fresh suit on the very same cause of action in accordance with law.

¶77

In view of the Court permitting the withdrawal

¶78

of the suit, appeals have become infructous and are dismissed.

¶79

8 - NC: 2023:KHC:36186 RFA No. 2481 of 2007 C/W RFA No. 814 of 2007 RFA No. 815 of 2007 RFA No. 816 of 2007

¶80

Further, it is made clear that, this Court has not

¶81

expressed on the merits of the matter and parties are at liberty to canvass the merits and de-merits of the case in

¶82

the intended suits in accordance with law.

¶83

Sd/JUDGE

¶84

KAV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41 CT:SNN

Smt Nagamma v. H C Puttaswamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Nagamma v. H C Puttaswamy

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

Y Thimmarayappa S/O Y Thimmappa Vs M/S Famous Auto Financiers (Regd)

Sri L Narasimha Murthy Vs Sri Venkatesh Murthy

Smt N Nagin Taj Vs Sri P Narayana

Smt. Gowramma Vs Sri. Ramareddy

Smt Byamma Vs Sri Muniswamappa @ Chinnanna

Smt Nagamma Vs Smt.K.C.Chandrakala