Smt. Sudha v. the Bengaluru Development Authority

Karnataka HC3 Jul 2026RFA/1233/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; RFA No. 1233 of 2020 (NC: 2026:KHC:33373); decided 03.07.2026 by Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar. Appellant: Smt. Sudha W/o Nagesh (counsel: Sr. Sadashivaiah K G and Abhijith S). Respondents: Bengaluru Development Authority (R1) and Sri M K Puttaswamy (R2, counsel Sri Suresh.P). Subject: withdrawal of first appeal arising from a suit for permanent injunction (OS.No.7809/2013) dismissed on 20.03.2020; abatement of appeal on death of contesting respondent (03.08.2021); memo-based withdrawal; appeal dismissed as withdrawn; pending IAs disposed of. Statutes: Order XLI Rule 1 CPC; Section 96 CPC. No precedents cited; no quantum involved.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn on the appellant's memo; consequently, all pending interlocutory applications (IAs) stand disposed of. ¶31-32

Smt. Sudha Vs the Bengaluru Development Authority — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:33373 RFA No. 1233 of 2020

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1233 OF 2020 (INJ-)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. SUDHA W/O NAGESH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT No.65, 2^ND CROSS CHAMUNDINAGAR, BSK 3^RD STAGE BENGALURU-560 084.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SR. SADASHIVAIAH K G, AND SRI ABHIJITH S, ADVOCATES)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN K P WEST BENGALURU-560 001.

¶14

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

SRI M K PUTTASWAMY S/O KENCHEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/AT No.82 2^ND MAIN 2^ND CROSS MUNIRAMAPPA BLOCK BINNY MILL ROAD, GANGANAGAR BENGALURU-560 032.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI SURESH.P, ADVOCATE FOR C/R2 V/O DTD. 8.6.23, APPEAL AGAINST R1 ABATES)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:33373 RFA No. 1233 of 2020

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLI RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.03.2020 PASSED IN OS.No.7809/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶25

Learned counsel for appellant files a memo seeking withdrawal of the appeal. The memo is also signed by appellant and his counsel. The memo reads thus:

¶26

“The Appellant most humbly submits that the contesting Respondent No. 2 died on 03.08.2021 and as against the said Respondent the appeal is abated and the Appellant may be permitted to withdraw the appeal without prejudice to the right and interest of the Appellant and the 2^nd Respondent has clearly admit the possession of the Appellant and in view of the same the Appellant may be permitted to withdraw the appeal with a liberty to file a suit

¶27

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:33373 RFA No. 1233 of 2020

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

under the changed circumstances in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶31