Disposed¶33

Sri. Dharma. K v. Smt. Doddamma

Karnataka HC19 Mar 2025CRP/174/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRP No.174 of 2025, Karnataka HC, 19-03-2025; petition under Sec.115 CPC challenging order dt. 4.01.2025 in LAC No.25/2012 (Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Nelamangala) claiming entire Rs.64,00,000/- compensation by claimant no.4; withdrawal memo dt. 19.03.2025; petition disposed with liberty to refile; limitation-period discounting; Bench: Krishna S Dixit & Ramachandra D. Huddar JJ.; no precedent cited or decided.

What did the court decide?

Leave to withdraw the Civil Revision Petition with liberty to refile the same with the appropriate provision before the competent Court; the period spent prosecuting this petition to be discounted in computing limitation for any appeal or other proceeding. ¶33

Sri. Dharma. K Vs Smt. Doddamma — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11266-DB CRP No. 174 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶4

AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 174 OF 2025

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. DHARMA K S/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT KATTENAHALLI VILLAGE DUDDA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT, PIN - 573 201

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. NAGARAJU, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

SMT. DODDAMMA W/O D. RUDRAIAH SINCE DEAD BY HER LR's

¶12

Digitally signed by SHAKAMBARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

1(A). SMT. PUTTATHAYAMMA D/O LATE H. RUDRAIAH W/O LATE SHIVALINGAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT HONNENAHALI VILLAGE, SOMPURA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT -560 064

¶14

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT SMT. PUTTATHAYAMMA D/O LATE H. RUDRAIAH W/O LATE SHIVALINGAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT SCHOOL AYYA, HONNAGAVI MATTA SHARADA CROSS, SHIVAGANGE TUMKUR DISTRICT - 562 111.

¶15

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11266-DB CRP No. 174 of 2025

¶16

SMT. MANGALAMMA R/AT HONNENAHALLI VILLAGE, SOMPURA HOBLI BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PIN-560 064 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT SMT. MANGALAMMA D/O LATE H. RUDRAIAH W/O LATE MALLIKARJUNA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT HONNENAHALI VILLAGE SOMPURA HOBLI BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PIN-560 064 3. SMT. MANJULA D/O LATE THAYAMMA @ PUTTATHAYAMMA R/AT KADABAGERE VILLAGE BENGALURU NORTH TALUK PRESENT RESIDING AT SMT. MANJULA D/O LATE THAYAMMA @ PUTTATHAYAMMA W/O SRI LOKESH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT KADABAGERE VILLAGE BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU-562 130 4. SMT. SWARNAMBA D/O LATE PUTTAMMAIAH W/O LATE SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/AT HONNENAHALLI VILLAGE, SOMPURA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PIN-560 064 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT SMT. SWARNAMBA D/O LATE PUTTAMMAIAH W/O LATE SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/AT SWARNABHAVAN, 11^TH CROSS ROAD PIPELINE ROAD, KALYANA NAGAR T. DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 005

¶17

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11266-DB CRP No. 174 of 2025

¶18

SRI. NARENDRA BABU S/O LATE SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO. 1872, 20^TH MAIN ROAD VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU -560 040

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SEC.115 OF CPC., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 4.01.2025, PASSED IN LAC NO.25/2012 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT NELAMANGALA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE - A, AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION IN FAVOR OF PETITIONER/CLAIMANT NO.4 ENTITLING HIM TO GET ENTIRE COMPENSATION/AWARD OF RS.64,00,000/-.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT and

¶23

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT)

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner has files a memo

¶27

dated 19.03.2025 seeking leave of this Court to withdraw

¶28

the Civil Revision Petition with liberty to take appropriate proceeding against the impugned order. The said memo reads as under:

¶29

"I, the advocate for petitioner submits that the aforementioned petitioner withdraw and to refile the same with the appropriate provision before the competent Court, in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶30

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC:11266-DB CRP No. 174 of 2025

¶32

It hardly needs to be stated that while computing the period of limitation for filing the appeal, or such other proceeding the period spent in prosecuting this petition shall be discounted.

¶33

In view of the above, Civil Revision Petition is accordingly disposed off, with liberty as sought for.

¶34

Sd/(KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE

¶35

Sd/(RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE

¶36

AM, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

Sri. Dharma. K v. Smt. Doddamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Dharma. K v. Smt. Doddamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Nike India Private Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

M/S Atria Convergence Technologies Ltd., Vs the Assistant Commissioner

The Pr., Commissioner of Income TAX-3 Vs M/S Nike India Private Limited

M/S. Metropoli Overseas Ltd., Vs State of Karnataka

M/S. the Society of Brothers of Holy Cross Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Ashalatha Vs the State of Karnataka