Disposed

Sri Shankar v. Smt Selvi S

Karnataka HC14 Dec 2023RFA/950/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this regular first appeal under Section 96 of CPC against a permanent injunction decree, the High Court of Karnataka disposed of the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment and decree in favour of the parties based on a duly filed and signed joint memorandum confirming a settlement reached between them.

What did the court decide?

The impugned judgment and decree dated 17.04.2018 in O.S. No.984/2013 were set aside, and the appeal was disposed of in terms of the joint compromise memorandum.

Sri Shankar Vs Smt Selvi S — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:45588 RFA No. 950 of 2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 950 OF 2018 (INJ)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. SHANKAR, S/O LATE M. SUBRAMANYA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.152/32, 5^TH MAIN, 8^TH "A" CROSS, GANESHA BLOCK, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM, BENGALURU - 560 086

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

(BY SRI. J.M. RAJANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶11

SMT. SELVI S, D/O M. SUBRAMANYA, W/O PRABHAKAR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.152/32, 5^TH MAIN, 8^TH A CROSS,GANESHA BLOCK, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM, BENGALURU - 560 086.

¶12

SRI. SHEKAR , S/O M. SUBRAMANYA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.120, 5^TH CROSS, SAI BABA NAGARA, SRIRAMPURAM, BENGALURU - 560 021.

¶13

SRI. PRAKASH, S/O M. SUBRAMANYA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.120, 5^TH CROSS, SAI BABA NAGARA, SRIRAMPURAM, BENGALURU - 560 021.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R. PADMANABHA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 AND R3 ARE SERVED)

¶15

¶16

NC: 2023:KHC:45588 RFA No. 950 of 2018

¶17

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC 1908 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.04.2018 PASSED IN OS NO.984/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE XXII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

¶18

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

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

This appeal by the defendant No.3 in O.S.No.984/2013 is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 17.04.2018 passed by the XXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, whereby the said suit filed by respondent No.1plaintiff against the appellant-defendant No.3 and respondent Nos.2 and 3-defendant Nos.1 and 2 for permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable property was decreed by the trial Court in favour of the respondent No.1-plaintiff against the appellant-defendant No.3.

¶21

Appellant and respondents have filed Joint Memo.

¶22

The said Joint Memo reads as under:

¶23

"The Appellant submits that he had filed OS-521/2017 suit for declaration on the file of LII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore (CCH-53)) against this same respondent and which was dismissed and he had had filed appeal in RFA-2021/2023 and the matter has been settled

¶24

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:45588 RFA No. 950 of 2018

¶25

between the parties and reported the compromise between the Division bench of this Hon'ble court on 5/12/2023. Hence this Appeal filed against judgment and Decree in O.S.No.984/2013 on the file of XXII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge dated 17.04.2018 filed for Injunction does not survive for consideration and accordingly prays this Hon'ble Court set aside the judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.984/2013 on the file of XXII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge dated 17.04.2018 and allow the Appeal and dismiss the Suit, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶26

The said Joint Memo has been duly signed by the parties as well as their respective counsel.

¶27

Parties are physically present before the Court and they are identified by their respective counsel.

¶28

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and Joint Memo filed by the parties, the impugned judgment and decree dated 17.04.2018 passed in O.S.No.984/2013 by the XXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is hereby set aside and appeal is disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo.

¶29

Sd/JUDGE

¶30

GPG

Sri Shankar v. Smt Selvi S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Shankar v. Smt Selvi S

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

G Janardhan Vs Karnataka Prakruthi Chikitsa Prachara Trust

Vasavi Condiments and Food Courts Vs Smt. Puttamma

Sri Kariyappa H.M. Vs H M Munawar Pasha

Smt. Lakshmamma Vs Superintendent Engineer

Narasamma Vs Superintendent Engineer

G C Jayamma Vs Superintendent Engineer