High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Gayathri W/O Sunderamurthy vs Smt Anniamma W/O Jayavelu … on 3 December, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Smt Gayathri W/O Sunderamurthy vs Smt Anniamma W/O Jayavelu … on 3 December, 2010
Author: Dr.K.Bhakthavatsala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 3"' DAY OF DECEMBER 2010 

BEFORE

THE I~ION'BLE 13;.-. JUSTICE K. BHAK*rHAVA*i*s§A1;A IV" I

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.1276v";/éV()I()'7 {DEC 'SI :_I':%.T..J;  In

BE'I'W]3EN:

Smtfiayathri,

Aged about 88 years.

W / o.Sunderamurthy,

R/a.Portion of Premises

No.142/3, First Cross, ._

Corporation Division No.58,  '

Madivala, _    V     
BaI1ga1ore~56O 068.1 Q" _ _     "  ...APPELLAN'F

(By Sri.V. Sr1fIii\Ifé1sA,o.  {Ifé;BSE3I\I'F)
AND: I I I I 

1. Smtfimniamma, =
Adult,  _ -,  '
V " '/ o .Ja'3;ay¢1uoV, Modeiiiymi, «
 R/a.VNIo_U 15*,-_/1;.'_
73?" CIr"oSS.= .Jabba1"" Block,
Vyaiiliaval  '  I  . V V 
Pa1'ace"Gutta--hfa11io1;

 ' I ' ' Banga.I_ore;56Q§'.O03.

: .  'ayashafl
. Aduifi
 S/_o.T_h_o'1asi Lingam,



[\)

3. Saravana Gowda.
Adult.
S / oflhimmegowda,

Respondents 2 & 3 are

Jointly residing at

Premises No. }.42/3,

First Cross,

Corporation Division. b
No.58, Madivala, “l ‘

BangakHe4Mfl)O68. V; ;~fp§nEsPoNtflsNTS«

{By Sri.K.Narasimha Murthy, Adv. t’or’..C/R; 21;,
Appeal dismissed as against 1it_3}

This R.F.A is filed Lin.d’ef–‘.” Section CPC against the
Judgement 8: Decree dt.18.1 I.2l006._passed=inO.S.N0.8438/1998
on the file of the XXIV Addl. City Civil giudge.Banga1ore city (CCH
No.6) partly decreeing the” suit fo’r=..”dec1arat.i’on, direction for
partition and permalnefil in_iL1″r_1ctio’z’a. A V =

This appeal o’n._di’o,i”_ admission, this day, the Court
delivered t.heV’fo11owing:~af-«_
‘ l’pTdu§sMENT

ThL.i:§ViSx”§1O repteseiatation for the appellant.

pl Lea’1<nied4"coti11sei for the Respondent: No.1 is present and

' V–..__.st1bn1i'1;sthat zippeai becomes infructfuous as the decree is

V"~__a1i'eady eficectited and possession of the property is take'n and also

" = r4eoovei°elC':-the cost.

1

ikp/W I

UJ

3. Submission of the learned Counsei for the Respondent
No.1 is recorded.

4. Appeai is dismissed for nomprosecution.

Since the appeal itseif is dismissed for

I.A.II/OT’ for T.I and I.A.III/O7 for siaysdofjv “i1o{._’si1ivi<r§VJfof

consideration and accordingly, theyraije rej éciéd.

‘V ‘ .