M/S. Ganapathi Silks, v. Smt. Sandhya Ravindranath

Karnataka HC11 Feb 2026CRP/22/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC oral order (R Devdas J, 11.02.2026): Civil Revision Petition CRP No. 22 of 2026 under S.115 CPC, filed by M/s. Ganapathi Silks against the ejectment decree dated 14.10.2025 in OS No.874/2022 (XXX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru), was withdrawn at the petitioner's instance after a Registry objection on maintainability; dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file an appeal; no merits of the ejectment decree decided.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to file an appeal as prayed for; office to return the certified copies/original documents to the petitioner while retaining a copy for the file. ¶34-36

M/S. Ganapathi Silks, Vs Smt. Sandhya Ravindranath — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶34-36

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the Civil Revision Petition — the office having raised an objection regarding its maintainability — and file an appeal instead.

¶28

Court's answer

The petitioner's memo dated 11.02.2026 seeking leave to withdraw the Civil Revision Petition and to file an appeal was taken on record subject to all exceptions.

¶29-30

Ratio / Principle

The Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to file an appeal as prayed for.

¶34-36

Key takeaways

Office was directed to return the certified copies/original documents to the petitioner while retaining a copy of the same for the file.ratio¶37-39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRP No. 22 of 2026, filed under S.115 CPC by M/s. Ganapathi Silks (rep. by its partner G. N. Prakash) against Smt. Sandhya Ravindranath and others, challenged the order dated 14.10.2025 passed in OS No.874/2022 on the file of the XXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, decreeing the suit for ejectment. Coming on for orders, learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memo dated 11.02.2026 stating that the office had raised an objection regarding the maintainability of the Civil Revision Petition and seeking leave to withdraw the petition and file an appeal. The Court took the memo on record subject to all exceptions and dismissed the Civil Revision Petition as withdrawn, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal as prayed for, and directed the office to return the certified copies/original documents to the petitioner while retaining a copy for the file. No substantive point concerning the ejectment decree was examined or decided in this order.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:8380 CRP No. 22 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶8

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 22 OF 2026

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

M/S. GANAPATHI SILKS, A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.10, 1^ST FLOOR, 2^ND CROSS, C.K. CHENNAPPA GARDEN LALBAGH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560027 REP. BY ITS PARTNER G. N. PRAKASH

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. SHRIDHARA K., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

SMT. SANDHYA RAVINDRANATH, W/O C. RAVINDRANATH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

¶16

MR. R. MANAV, S/O C. RAVINDRANATH, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS

¶17

MASTER R. RAGHAV, W/O C. RAVINDRANATH, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS,

¶18

REP. BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN

¶19

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:8380 CRP No. 22 of 2026

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

MOTHER SMT. SANDHYA RAVINDRANATH ALL ARE R/A NO.16, 1^ST CROSS, MISSION ROAD CROSS, SREENIVASA COLONY, BENGALURU – 560027.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

THIS CRP FILED UNDER SEC.115 OF CPC., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 14.10.2025 PASSED IN OS NO.874/2022 ON THE FILE OF XXX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU., DECREEING THE SUIT FOR EJECTMENT.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo dated 11.02.2026 stating that the office has raised an objection regarding the maintainability of the Civil Revision Petition. Therefore, the petitioner seeks leave of this Court to withdraw this petition and to file an appeal.

¶29