IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 15' DAY OF OCTOBER 2010
BEFORE
THE HONBLE Dr. JUSTICE K. BHAKTHAVATSALA' « v.p..._O: _
MISC. cvr. No.13167/2910
IN R.F.A.No.203/2008 :{PA1ag-f " A
BETWEEN: A
Smt.Nagamma,
W/o.13.te S1'i.Muniyappa
@ Muniyanna, ' . V V"
Aged 83 years. ' 'O I = O' n_..*.APPELLANT
(By Sri.R.A.Devanand, 4/Xd'zr,} H A A A
1. Sri.R.Shivar.1_na.4' A
S / o.1ate Sr'i.Ra._rnaiah,_
Aged 50 years, _V
andVo_thers~.'5, " .; ...RESPONDENTS
[By'Sri.I\fagendvra. Adv. for R-- 1 es: 2)
is filed under Order 22 Rule 10 of CPC
dlprayipng to permit the proposed L.Rs of deceased appellant to come
"-€i11'F¢c~ord for reasons stated therein.
"Misc. Cvi. coming on for orders, this day, the Court
,, J , 'mad? the folloxxring: --
ORDER
l\/Iisc.Cvl.l3l6′?/2010 is an application filed under
XXH Rule 10 of CPC seeking permission for the_.appl.ican’tifl’p V’
lVl.L.Satish. 44 years, to come on record i-¢pres§§’mg.:_ivé’ of
the deceased appellant. The application lS..Aa:f’kU€X€d.p’v\*l’iAt:.h
of the applicant. The application doesnot contain
when the appellant died. Further, th¢ag;p;l¢;aa ciainis’ half of
the suit schedule property favour by the
appellant as per the… Neither the
original Will ,.i’s annexed with the
appficationl …. .. «. . :
Learned’c.opi§1f1sel’lorjzeslpondents 1 and 2 submits that the
Respondent of the deceased appellant and
application filed by the applicant.
viz. M. L._esat;s:h…_ ” A’ . V
.p Thelappllication is rejected on the ground that the application
.f;does.y:n’otecontain when the appellant died and death certificate is
notldlenclosed and copy of the Will is also not furnished. On
.p , V _ T t1i.es’e– grounds, the application ip r
1 3
Since the appellant is dead, the Respondent No.3 is
admittedly the son of the deceased, shall be transposed as L¢__R of
the appellant and the counsel for Respondents 1 and 2 is
to make necessary correction in the eause–tit1e. 9
bnv*