Dismissed

Sri. Nagendrappa v. Smt. Sunandamma

Karnataka HC6 Oct 2023WP/18050/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka held that the writ petition filed to set aside an order accepting commissioner reports became infructuous because the trial court had already disposed of the underlying suit (O.S.No.116/2012) while the petition was pending. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.

Sri. Nagendrappa Vs Smt. Sunandamma — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

NC: 2023:KHC:36366 WP No.18050 of 2019

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.18050 OF 2019 (GM-CPC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶8

SRI. NAGENDRAPPA S/O LATE GOVINDAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT. VEDAVATHI NAGARA HIRIYUR TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.

¶9

(BY SRI. MURTHY K, ADV.,)

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

AND:

¶12

SMT. SUNANDAMMA W/O THIPPESWAMY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.

¶13

SMT. THAYAMMA W/O ESHWARAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS.

¶14

SMT. DYMAKKA W/O ESHWARAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

¶15

SRI. ESHWARAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.

¶16

SMT. KARIYAMMA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.

¶17

NC: 2023:KHC:36366 WP No.18050 of 2019

¶18

¶19

RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 5 ARE R/AT VEDAVATHI NAGARA HIRIYUR TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501.

¶20

MARIYAJJI DEAD BY LRS.

¶21

6(a) SRI. GURUNATHA @ GURUAPPA S/O LATE KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

¶22

6(b) SRI. RANGAPPA @ SANNA MARAPPA S/O LATE KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

¶23

RESPONDENTS NO.6(a) & 6(b) ARE RESIDING AT BEHIND SRI. KRISHNA BAR VEDAVATHI NAGARA HIRIYUR TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501.

¶24

6(c) SRI. KOLIRAJA @ KOLI RANGAPPA S/O LATE KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT GAYATHRIPURA VILLAGE HIRIYUR TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501.

¶25

6(d) SRI. DODDA MARAYAPPA @ MARAPPA S/O LATE KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT NAYAKANAHATTI VILLAGE CHALLAKERE TALUK

¶26

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501.

¶27

6(e) SMT. GANGAMMA W/O MURTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

¶28

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:36366 WP No.18050 of 2019

¶29

R/AT RANGAVVANAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI CHALLAKERE TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501.

¶30

6(f) SMT. THIPPAMMA W/O MARAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT NAYAKANAHATTI VILLAG, CHALLAKERE TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501.

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(NOTICE TO R1, R2, R3, R4, R6(a) TO R6(c) AND R6(e) ARE SERVED)

¶33

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER AT ANNEXURE-A DATED 30.3.2019 ACCEPTING THE COMMISSIONER REPORTS AT ANNEXURE-F1 DATED 31.12.2018 AND ANNEXURE-H1 DATED 26.2.2019 IN O.S.NO.116/2012 BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HIRIYUR, BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION. QUASH ANNEXURE-F1 COMMISSIONER REPORT DATED 31.12.2018 IN O.S.NO.116/2012 BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HIRIYUR & ETC.

¶34

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶35

¶36

NC: 2023:KHC:36366 WP No.18050 of 2019

¶37

ORDER

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a

¶39

memo. The memo reads as under:

¶40

"The under singed is herewith producing C.C. copy of the judgment and decree in O.S.No.116/2012, wherein during pendency of the interim order in the above writ petition, the trial court has proceeded to dispose of the suit on 4.8.2023.

¶41

Further, the petitioner herein has challenged the judgment and decree in so far as dismissing the suit for Mandatory and permanent injunction before the 1st Appellate court in R.A.No.22/2023, which is pending.

¶42

C.C. copy of the Judgment and decree in O.S.No.116/2012 dated 4.8.2023 is here with produced for kind perusal of this Hon'ble court.

¶43

Hence, this memo in the interest of justice and equity".

¶44

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:36366 WP No.18050 of 2019

¶45

In view of the same, nothing survives for consideration in the present writ petition.

¶46

The writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.

¶47

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has assailed the judgment and decree dated 04.08.2023 passed in O.S.No.116/2012 in R.A.No.22/2023. The said submission is placed on record.

¶48

All the contentions urged by the petitioner are

¶49

kept open to be alleged before the Trial Court.

¶50

Sd/JUDGE

¶51

Sri. Nagendrappa v. Smt. Sunandamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Nagendrappa v. Smt. Sunandamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Canopy Restaurant Vs the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike

Sri K N Govinda Adiga Vs Sri K N Subramanya Adiga

Sri. B.M. Devaiah Vs Sri. P.T. Kiran

Sri Ramaiah Vs Sri Anjinappa a M

Sri v Ramesh Vs Sri M Venkateshappa (Since Dead)

Smt Sannamma Vs Mysuru District School