Dismissed

Sri Vishwanath Abbaiah v. Sri Ramakrishna Reddy

Karnataka HC5 Mar 2026MFA/6720/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a miscellaneous first appeal filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The appellate court allowed the withdrawal of the appeal by the appellant, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn by the appellant with liberty to file a fresh petition.

Sri Vishwanath Abbaiah Vs Sri Ramakrishna Reddy — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:13529 MFA No. 6720 of 2024

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6720 OF 2024 (AA)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI VISHWANATH ABBAIAH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, SON OF LATE SRI. ABBAIAH, R/AT NO.15/1, PUTTAIAHNAPALYA, 2^ND MAIN ROAD, 9^TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560069.

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

(BY MS. MEGHANA BALLAL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

SRI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY AGED BOUT 77 YEARS,. SON OF MUNIYAPPA REDDY, RESIDING AT NO.236 HALANAYAKANAHALLI, CARMELARAM, BENGALURU-560035

¶16

SMT.BABITHA CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, WIFE OF SRI.CHANDRASHEKAR MUNIYAPPA, RESIDING AT BHAVANA, NO.6, 19^TH CROSS, 1^ST MAIN, B.K. NAGAR, YESHWANTHAPUR, BENGALURU-560022.

¶17

SRI. VENUGOPAL .R AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, SON OF SRI.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, RESIDING AT NO.39, HALANAYAKANAHALLI,

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:13529 MFA No. 6720 of 2024

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

SARJAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU-560035

¶21

SRI. THARUN .V AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, SON OF SRI. VENUGOPAL .R RESIDING AT HALANAYAKANAHALLI, CARMELARAM, BENGALURU-560035

¶22

SMT. MALATHI AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF SRI. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, WIFE OF SRI N. NARENDRA KUMAR, RESIDING AT NO.647, 30^TH MAIN, 11^TH B CROSS, J.P. NAGAR, BENGALURU-560078.

¶23

SRI. R. ANIL KUMAR AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, SON OF SRI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, R/AT #39, HALANAYAKANAHALLI, CARMELARAM, BENGALURU-560035.

¶24

SRI. MOHAN REDDY AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, SON OF SRI.MUNIYAPPA REDDY, R/AT #39, HALANAYAKANAHALLI, CARMELARAM, BENGALURU-560035.

¶25

SMT. H.M. LATHA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF SRI H.M. MOHAN REDDY, RESIDING AT NO.153, HALANAYAKANAHALLI, CARMELARAM, BENGALURU-560035.

¶26

SRI. H.M. PRAKASH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, SON OF SRI MUNIYAPPA REDDY, RESIDING AT NO 39, VARTHUR HOBLI, HALANAYAKANAHALLI, JUNNASANDRA, CARMELARAM, BENGALURU-560035.

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:13529 MFA No. 6720 of 2024

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

SRI.CHETAN .P AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, SON OF SRI. PRAKASH H.M., R/AT NO.223, RBR LAYOUT, NEAR WIPRO GATE SARJAPUR ROAD, JUNNASANDRA, BENGALURU-560035.

¶30

SMT. H.M. RAMAKKA AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF LATE SRI MUNIYAPPA REDDY, WIFE OF SRI P. SEETHARAMA REDDY, R/AT 31, MAHESHWARAMMA TEMPLE, APPAREDDY PALYA, BENGALURU NORTH,

¶31

BENGALURU-560038.

¶32

SMT. H.M. SARASWATHI AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF LATE SRI. MUNIYAPPA REDDY, WIFE OF SRI A. ANKANNA, RESIDING AT NO.1636, 26^TH MAIN, 2^ND SECTOR, BENGALURU-560102.

¶33

SMT. H.M. VIJAYAMMA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF LATE SRI MUNIYAPPA REDDY, RESIDING AT NO.59, RAYASANDRA, KUDLU PANCHAYAT, HUSKUR, BENGALURU-560099.

¶34

SMT. BHARATHI AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF LATE SRI.MUNIYAPPA REDDY, WIFE OF SRI GOPAL REDDY, AMRUTHANANDAMAY COLLEGE ROAD, NEAR BRS SCHOOL, KASAVANAHALLI, KAIKONDRAHALLI, BENGALURU-560035.

¶35

SMT. H.M. SHYLA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF LATE MUNIYAPPA REDDY,

¶36

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:13529 MFA No. 6720 of 2024

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

WIFE OF SRI K.N. SHEKAR, RESIDING AT NO.625, SRI. NARAYANAKRUPA, 17^TH A MAIN, 6^TH BLOCK, KORAMNGALA, BENGALURU-560095.

¶39

SRI. H.R. NATARAJ AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, SON OF LATE SRI. RUDRAPPA .H R/AT NO.812, 12^TH MAIN ROAD, VINAYAKA LAYOUT, NAGARBHAVI 2^ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560072.

¶40

…RESPONDENTS

¶41

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 37(1)(b) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 12.09.2024 PASSED ON I.A.NO.2 IN A.A.NO.39/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE XXIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, (CCH-30), ISSUING EMERGENT NOTICE ON I.A.NO.2 AND NOTICE ON ARBITRATION APPLICATION TO THE RESPONDENTS FILED UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 R/W ORDER 39 RULES 1 AND 2 OF CPC.

¶42

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶43

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶44

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶45

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has filed

¶46

a memo seeking to withdrawal of the appeal, which reads as under:

¶47

"1. This MFA is filed under Section 37(1)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation act, against the order dated 12.09.2024 passed on I.A.no.2 in

¶48

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:13529 MFA No. 6720 of 2024

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

A.A.No.42/2024 on the file of the XXIX Additional City Civil and Sessions judge, Bengaluru (CCH--30), passed on order of issuing emergent notice on I.A.No.2 and notice on arbitration application to the respondents.

¶51

2. The Registry raised an objection regarding maintainability of the appeal against the order passed by the XXIX Additional city civil judge, Bengaluru.

¶52

3. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this present memo without prejudice to the rights and contentions raised in the present petition. In the light of the above facts, the petitioner craves leave of this Hon'ble court to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh petition in case of need/the benefit of the old scheme is not extended to the petitioner."

¶53

2. In view of the memo, the appeal is dismissed

¶54

as withdrawn.

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

_____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶57

PHM

¶58

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Sri Vishwanath Abbaiah v. Sri Ramakrishna Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Vishwanath Abbaiah v. Sri Ramakrishna Reddy

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

Smt Kusuma Vs the Secretary

Sri. D Dorai Pandyan Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Tejas Surya Constructions Properties Vs the Commissioner

K Ravi Thammaiah Vs Neelamma

Mr Gangadaraiah G Vs the Exeucitve Engineer (Aee)

Srivatsa.S., Vs Smt. Rajalakshmi