M/S Sai Blossoms Developers, Vs Sri v T Kiran Kumar — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

M/S Sai Blossoms Developers, Vs Sri v T Kiran Kumar — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file an appeal before the District Court; time consumed in pursuing this appeal to be deducted while calculating limitation for the fresh appeal; certified copy of the impugned judgment and decree to be returned to the appellant's counsel; pending interlocutory applications dismissed.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the memo filed by the learned counsel for the appellant seeking permission to withdraw the appeal with liberty to file an appeal before the District Court, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Key takeaways

Office is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court to the learned counsel for the appellant after retaining a photocopy.ratio¶30
The time consumed in pursuing this appeal shall be deducted while calculating the limitation applicable to an appeal that may be filed by the appellant before the District Court.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (R. Nataraj, J.), oral judgment dated 05.03.2026 in RFA No. 2680 of 2025 (SP), filed under Section 96 of CPC read with Order 41 Rule 1 of CPC by M/s. Sai Blossoms Developers against the judgment and decree dated 11.09.2025 passed by the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, in O.S.No.1174/2006 decreeing the suit for specific performance of contract. The learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo seeking permission to withdraw the appeal with liberty to file an appeal before the District Court; in view of the memo the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. Office was directed to return the certified copy of the impugned judgment and decree to the appellant's counsel after retaining a photocopy; the time consumed in pursuing this appeal was ordered to be deducted while calculating the limitation applicable to an appeal before the District Court; and pending interlocutory applications were dismissed as not surviving.

NC: 2026:KHC:13500 RFA No. 2680 of 2025

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.2680 OF 2025 (SP)

BETWEEN:

M/S. SAI BLOSSOMS DEVELOPERS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM OFFICE AT NO.11, 1^ST FLOOR HOSUR MAIN ROAD, MADIWALA BENGALURU-560 068 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI. VIJAY SAI S/O. THAMMAIAH NAIDU AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS …APPELLANT

(BY SRI SHARATH KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

SRI V. T. KIRAN KUMAR S/O. DR. VIVEKANANDA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT.NO.3, 17^TH "A" CROSS OPPOSITE GEO HOTEL SAMPANGIRAMANAGAR BENGALURU-560 027

SMT. HEMALATHA J. D/O. LATE S. G. JAYARAM AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT.NO.14/3, ANDREES ROAD SHANTHINAGARA BENGALURU-560 027

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:13500 RFA No. 2680 of 2025

HC-KAR

SRI R. K. SUBBA RAO S/O. SHANUBHOG KRISHNA RAO AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS R/AT. RAMPURA VILLAGE BIDARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU-560 049

SRI JAMEEL PASHA S/O. SYED ANWAR AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT.NO.10, POST OFFICE ROAD NEW EXTENSION, KADUGODI WHITEFIELD BENGALURU-560 066

…RESPONDENTS

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, READ WITH ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.09.2025 PASSED IN O.S.NO.1174/2006 ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo

seeking permission of this Court to withdraw this appeal, with

liberty to file an appeal before the District Court.

In view of the memo, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:13500 RFA No. 2680 of 2025

HC-KAR

Office is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, to the learned counsel for the appellant after retaining a photocopy.

The time consumed in pursuing this appeal shall be deducted while calculating the limitation applicable to an appeal that may be filed by the appellant before the District Court.

In view of dismissal of main appeal, pending

interlocutory applications if any, do not survive for

consideration and the same stands dismissed.

Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

HJ

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8