Sri B S Jagadeesh v. Smt D S Suma
Case brief
What is this about?
Divorce appeal under the Hindu Marriage Act was dismissed as infructuous after a memo stated the sole appellant had died and no legal representative wished to continue the appeal.
Divorce appeal under the Hindu Marriage Act was dismissed as infructuous after a memo stated the sole appellant had died and no legal representative wished to continue the appeal.
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: 2024:KHC:1290-DB MFA No. 6367 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024 PRESENT
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6367 OF 2016 (MC)
BETWEEN:
SRI. B.S. JAGADEESH, S/O LATE T.C. SIDDALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS D NO.B.3/92, KOLADA BEEDHI, SRIRANGAPATNA-571 438, MANDYA DISTRICT.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIRUPAKSHAIAH P.H., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by SHAKAMBARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SMT. D.S. SUMA D/O D.V. SADASHIVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, #1122, 5TH MAIN, VIVEKANANDANAGARA, MYSURU-570 023.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. HANUMANTHA REDDY Y.S., ADVOCATE)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S 19(1) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:18.7.2016 PASSED IN M.C NO.81/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, MYSURU, REJECTING THE PETITION FILED U/S 13(1)(ib) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT.
NC: 2024:KHC:1290-DB MFA No. 6367 of 2016
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, DR.H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo
stating that the sole appellant passed away on 20.8.2021,
as such, the present appeal having become infructuous, be dismissed. During his submission, he has also pointed out that, none of the legal representatives of the appellant are interested to continue the appeal, as such, the appeal has to be dismissed as having become infructuous.
the Appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
Sk/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56
2 provisions across 2 enactments
B.S. Jagadeesh
D.S. Suma
H.B. Prabhakara Sastry
Ramachandra D. Huddar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court