The appellant, in a Second Appeal, stated they did not wish to continue the proceedings. The High Court dismissed the appeal as not pressed.
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:27751 RSA No. 1092 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1092 OF 2021 (INJ)
BETWEEN:
…APPELLANT (BY SRI SHANATH KUMAR SHETTY K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by SHARANYA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3 ARE CHILDREN OF LATE M. SADASHIVA THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT SURATKAL MANGALURU-575 014.
THE RESPONDENTS ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR
P.A. HOLDER, M.SANKAPPA S/O LATE GURUVA MAISTRY AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS R/AT GURUKRIPA HOUSE THADAMBIL, SURATKAL P.O MANGALURU-574 158.
…RESPONDENTS
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 R/W RULE 1 OF ORDER XLII OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 31.10.2019 PASSED IN R.A.NO. 120/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE CJM., MANGALURU D.K., ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.09.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO. 432/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE C/C OF 1st ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., MANGALURU, D.K.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The counsel for appellant has filed a memo stating that the appellant does not wish to continue the Second Appeal.
Hence, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed.
RHS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18
Sd/JUDGE
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SHIVARAM ANCHAN
MRS. LEENA
SHAILESH
SANDESH
MRS. LAXMI
H.P. SANDESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
