Disposed

G Prashantha Kumar @ Babu v. T Muddarangegowda

Karnataka HC22 Feb 2024RSA/1138/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second appeals over possession of schedule property disposed of on the basis of an order dated 12.06.2023 and the appellant's affidavit undertaking to hand over vacant possession by 12.04.2024, with liberty reserved to parties regarding deposited amount and damages before the Executing Court.

What did the court decide?

Appeals disposed per undertaking; appellant to hand over vacant possession to respondent no.6 by 12.04.2024; liberty to parties before Executing Court for release of deposited amount and damages.

G Prashantha Kumar @ Babu Vs T Muddarangegowda — Execution and Attachment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:7544 RSA No. 1138 of 2015 C/W RSA No. 1139 of 2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI

¶6

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1138 OF 2015 (MOR)

¶7

C/W

¶8

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1139 OF 2015(MOR) IN R.S.A.No.1138/2015:

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

G. PRASHANTHA KUMAR @ BABU, S/O GANGARAM, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O THIMMANAHALLI - 572 214. KANDIKERE HOBLI, C.N. HALLI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT.

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI HARISH N.R AND SRI PATEL D KARE GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

T. MUDDARANGEGOWDA, 80 YEARS, SON OF THOREYAPPA, SINCE DEAD BY LRS.

¶16

LR (a) ANUSUYAMMA, 55 YEARS, D/O MUDDARANGEGOWDA, DEAD BY LRS.

¶17

LR (A) (a) P.S. MOHANKUMAR, 40 YEARS, S/O ANUSUYAMMA, DEAD BY LRS.

¶18

JAYALAKSHMI, AGED 44 YEARS, W/O LATE P.S. MOHANKUMAR,

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:7544 RSA No. 1138 of 2015 C/W RSA No. 1139 of 2015

¶20

ULLAS KUMAR, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O MOHANKUMAR,

¶21

DEEPIKA, AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS, D/O MOHANKUMAR,

¶22

KAVYA, AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS, D/O MOHANKUMAR,

¶23

RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 ARE MINORS, REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER JAYALAKSHMI FIRST RESPONDENT.

¶24

RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 ARE R/O PANJIGANAHALLI - 572 137. KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT.

¶25

P.S. PREMA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, D/O ANUSUYAMMA.

¶26

P.S. ANANTHARAJU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O ANUSUYAMMA.

¶27

P.S. BHARGAVARAM, S/O ANUSUYAMMA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS.

¶28

P.S. RANGANATHA, S/O ANUSUYAMMA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS.

¶29

SUSHEELAMMA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, D/O MUDDARANGEGOWDA.

¶30

RESPONDENTS 5 TO 9 ARE RESIDENTS OF PANJIGANAHALLI - 572 137. KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT.

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SRI KESHAV R. AGNIHOTRI, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2, R5 TO R9; R3 AND R4 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER NATURAL GUARDIAN R1)

¶33

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:7544 RSA No. 1138 of 2015 C/W RSA No. 1139 of 2015

¶34

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.03.2015 PASSED IN R.A.No.38/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND MODIFYING JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 06.06.2011 PASSED IN O.S.No.54/1992 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI.

¶35

IN R.S.A.No.1139/2015:

¶36

BETWEEN:

¶37

G. PRASHANTHA KUMAR @ BABU, S/O GANGARAM, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O THIMMANAHALLI - 572 214. KANDIKERE HOBLI,C.N. HALLI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT.

¶38

…APPELLANT

¶39

(BY SRI HARISH N.R AND SRI PATEL D KARE GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

¶40

AND:

¶41

T. MUDDARANGEGOWDA, 80 YEARS, SON OF THOREYAPPA, SINCE DEAD BY LRS. LR (a) ANUSUYAMMA, 55 YEARS, D/O MUDDARANGEGOWDA, DEAD BY LRS. LR (A) (a) P.S. MOHANKUMAR, 40 YEARS, S/O ANUSUYAMMA, DEAD BY LRS.

¶42

JAYALAKSHMI, AGED 44 YEARS, W/O LATE P.S. MOHANKUMAR,

¶43

ULLAS KUMAR, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O MOHANKUMAR,

¶44

DEEPIKA, AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS, D/O MOHANKUMAR,

¶45

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:7544 RSA No. 1138 of 2015 C/W RSA No. 1139 of 2015

¶46

KAVYA, AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS, D/O MOHANKUMAR,

¶47

RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 ARE MINORS, REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER JAYALAKSHMI FIRST RESPONDENT.

¶48

RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 ARE R/O PANJIGANAHALLI - 572 137. KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT.

¶49

P.S. PREMA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, D/O ANUSUYAMMA.

¶50

P.S. ANANTHARAJU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O ANUSUYAMMA.

¶51

P.S. BHARGAVARAM, S/O ANUSUYAMMA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS.

¶52

P.S. RANGANATHA, S/O ANUSUYAMMA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS.

¶53

SUSHEELAMMA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, D/O MUDDARANGEGOWDA.

¶54

RESPONDENTS 5 TO 9 ARE RESIDENTS OF PANJIGANAHALLI - 572 137. KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT.

¶55

…RESPONDENTS

¶56

(BY SRI KESHAV R. AGNIHOTRI, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2, R5 TO R9; R3 AND R4 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER NATURAL GUARDIAN R1)

¶57

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.03.2015 PASSED IN R.A.NO.25/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ITINERATE COURT, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND MODIFYING THE ORDER DATED 06.06.2011 PASSED IN O.S.No.54/1992 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI.

¶58

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:7544 RSA No. 1138 of 2015 C/W RSA No. 1139 of 2015

¶59

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶60

JUDGMENT

¶61

Learned counsel for respondents has filed a memo for disposal stating that when matter was listed on 12.06.2023, appellant and respondents were present wherein appellant had agreed to hand over vacant possession of schedule property to respondents within 10 months and order sheet was also signed by parties and therefore, appeal may be disposed of in terms of said order.

¶62

Learned counsel for appellant submits that an affidavit undertaking is filed in terms of said order agreeing to vacate and hand over possession of schedule premises to respondents on or before 12.04.2024.

¶63

It is also stated that respondent No.6 has deposited a sum of Rs.1,56,305/- before Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, C.N.Halli in F.D.P.No.20/2018 and for release of said amount, appellant would file application before Executing Court. Likewise, counsel for respondent no.6 submitted that application for claiming damages for ten months of occupation permitted under affidavit would be filed before Executing Court.

¶64

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:7544 RSA No. 1138 of 2015 C/W RSA No. 1139 of 2015

¶65

Reserving liberty to parties to work out their

¶66

remedies before Executing Court insofar as release of amount in deposit or for damages respectively, affidavit undertaking is taken on record.

¶67

In light of order dated 12.06.2023 and affidavit undertaking, appellant shall hand over vacant possession of schedule property to respondent no.6 on or before 6:00 p.m. of 12.04.2024 with clarification that appellant would not be entitled to seek for any further extension on any grounds whatsoever.

¶68

Accordingly, both appeals stand disposed of.

¶69

Registry to draw decree incorporating terms of affidavit undertaking in respective appeals.

¶70

Sd/JUDGE

¶71

MKM/MR

¶72

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

G Prashantha Kumar @ Babu v. T Muddarangegowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G Prashantha Kumar @ Babu v. T Muddarangegowda

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

Kumari Hemalatha M S Vs the Vice Chancellor

Smt Gayathri G Vs Karnataka State Law University

Mr. Raghu R Vs the National Commissioner for Indian System of Medicine

Smt Sunandamma Vs the Chief Officer Town Municipal Council

Sri C Muniswamy Reddy Vs Sri Ravindra Kumar

Sri. Ramesh N P Vs State of Karnataka