Disposed¶45

Sri Hemantraj B v. M/S Global E-Softsys Pvt. Ltd.

Karnataka HC25 Apr 2026RFA/978/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

RFA 978/2019, Karnataka High Court, decided 25.04.2026 by Anant Ramanath Hegde J.; defendant's Section 96 CPC appeal against money-recovery decree dated 02.02.2019 in O.S.No.2818/2013; respondent (decree holder) filed memo dated 07.04.2026 stating it would not proceed with execution petition Ex.Pet.No.1576/2019; suit dismissed as withdrawn; impugned judgment and decree set aside; appeal disposed of; refund of admissible court fee directed; no merits adjudication; parties: Hemantraj B v. M/s Global E-Softsys Pvt Ltd.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of; suit O.S.No.2818/2013 dismissed as withdrawn; impugned judgment and decree dated 02.02.2019 set aside; Registry directed to refund the admissible court fee. ¶45

Sri Hemantraj B Vs M/S Global E-Softsys Pvt. Ltd. — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of; suit O.S.No.2818/2013 dismissed as withdrawn; impugned judgment and decree dated 02.02.2019 set aside; Registry directed to refund the admissible court fee.

¶45

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the respondent/plaintiff's memo dated 07.04.2026 stating that the decree holder will not proceed with execution of the decree in Ex.Pet.No.1576/2019 (in substance, withdrawal of the suit), the appeal should be disposed of and the suit dismissed as withdrawn.

¶38

Court's answer

The Court read the respondent/plaintiff's memo as indicating that the decree holder will not execute the decree; in substance, the respondent/plaintiff is withdrawing the suit.

¶41

Ratio / Principle

The suit in O.S.No.2818/2013 on the file of the VIII Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru, is dismissed as withdrawn, and the impugned judgment and decree are set aside.

¶44

Key takeaways

The appeal does not survive for consideration and is disposed of.ratio¶45

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court (Bengaluru), single judge — Anant Ramanath Hegde J. Regular First Appeal No. 978 of 2019, filed under S.96 CPC by the defendant (Hemantraj B) against the judgment and decree dated 02.02.2019 in O.S.No.2818/2013 (VIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-15), Bengaluru), which had decreed the plaintiff's (M/s Global E-Softsys Pvt Ltd) suit for damages / recovery of money and dismissed the defendant's counter claim. Before final hearing, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff filed a memo dated 07.04.2026 stating that the decree holder, who had earlier instituted execution proceedings (Ex.Pet.No.1576/2019), would not proceed with the execution case and requesting disposal of the appeal. The Court treated this as an intimation that the respondent/plaintiff was withdrawing the suit, dismissed the suit as withdrawn, set aside the impugned judgment and decree, held the appeal as not surviving and disposed of it, and directed the Registry to refund the admissible court fee. The merits of the money decree were not adjudicated.

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:23753 RFA No. 978 of 2019

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH

¶8

HEGDE

¶9

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 978 OF 2019

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SRI HEMANTRAJ B AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, S/O SRI RAJASEKHARA B RESIDING AT NO.294, 8TH MAIN, CANARA BANK COLONY, NAGARABHAVI ROAD BANGALORE-560072.

¶12

Digitally signed …APPELLANT by BELUR RANGADHAMA (BY SRI. SHANKARANARAYANA BHAT N., ADVOCATE) NANDINI Location: HIGH AND: COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

…APPELLANT

¶14

M/S GLOBAL E-SOFTSYS PVT LTD A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.327, 1^ST FLOOR, "SUMERCE", 15^TH CROSS,

¶15

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:23753 RFA No. 978 of 2019

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

2^ND BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BANGALORE-560011 REPRESENTED BY ITS GPA HOLDER OPERATIONS AND MARKETING MANAGER, SRI C. SRINIVAS MURTHY.

¶18

…RESPONDENT

¶19

(BY SRI. RANGARAMU V., ADVOCATE)

¶20

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC.,

¶21

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 02.02.2019 PASSED IN OS.NO.2818/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIOINAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-15) BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR DAMAGES AND DISMISSING THE COUNTER CLAIM APPELLANT HEREIN.

¶22

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

¶23

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:23753 RFA No. 978 of 2019

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

Learned counsel for the appellant and respondent are

¶28

present.

¶29

This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree for recovery of money dated 02.02.2019, passed by the VIII Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru, in O.S.No.2818/2013.

¶30

Learned counsel appearing for the

¶31

respondent/plaintiff has filed a memo dated 07.04.2026, which reads as under :

¶32

" IN THE ABOVE APPEAL, THE SUIT OF THE PLAINTIFF / RESPONDENT IS DECREED THE SUIT IN O.S.NO.2818/2013, IS DECREED ON 02.02.2019 AGAINST THAT JUDGMENT AND DECREE, THE DEFENDANT / APPELLANT HAS FILED THIS APPEAL.

¶33

THE RESPONDENT HEREIN FILED THE EXECUTION PETITION BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT FOR EXECUTING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE FOR RECOVERY OF THE DECREETAL AMOUNT IN THE EX.PET.NO.1576/2019.

¶34

THE SAID DECREE HOLDER / RESPONDENT WILL NOT PROCEED WITH THE EXECUTION CASE, WITH THIS

¶35

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:23753 RFA No. 978 of 2019

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

OBSERVATION THE APPEAL MAY BE DISPOSED OF IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY."

¶39