Smt.Sharada Shedthy v. Smt.Madhu Hengsu
Case brief
What is this about?
In a regular second appeal regarding a possession suit, the court noted that the respondent had vacated the property. Viewing the matter as concluded, the court disposed of the appeal without further consideration on merits.
What the court decided
- 1 -
NC: 2023:KHC:23871 RSA No. 618 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.618 OF 2016 (POS)
BETWEEN:
SMT.SHARADA SHEDTHY AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, D/O LATE KARIKATTE NAGAMMA SHEDTHY, AGRICULTURIST, POST: BYNDOOR VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 574 201.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. K.CHANDRANATH ARIGA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal requires disposal when the respondent has already vacated the property.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Smt. Sharada Shedthy
- respondent
Smt. Madu Hengsu
Coram
Jyoti Mulimani
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Karnataka HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- RSA/618/2016
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court