1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2010
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATHTFI~'TT=:
RFA N0.1319 OF 2005
BETWEEN:
SRI.D.THIMMA REDDY,
MAJOR, N0.596,
S.S.TEMPLE STREET,
V.V.PURAM, BANGALORE -04
REPTD. BY POWER OF A
HOLDER SRLSURYA PRAi<ASH."~..7' V _
V H ARPELLANT.
(BY M/S, SUDARS.H.ArNA REDDV ASSOCIATES ADVOCATES)
AND: 'T 'V
SMT.|v'ALATHI; MAJOR, V'
' D/O AN} LJ NATHAIA--H',
PA*IfAL,'\M"i*/IA TEMPLE STREET,
=.BASAVAI\:.A'GI,;IDVI',
B'1'\¥'JGAOLCF{'E,,_--
A Z" A ...RESPONDENT
(“BY SRI”.C..7’G.GOPALASwAMv, ADVOCATE)
_ REA FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CIVIL
V.VffT>ROCEDuRE CODE AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
KDATED 14.7.2005 PASSED IN O.S.No.3400/O2 ON THE
A FILE OF THE xv ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BANGALORE, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR EJECTMENT.
VZT
THIS APPEAL COMING /RON FOR HEARING THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
JIJDGMENT
An application under Order 23 Rule 3 of the’t’..Civ_Vi|
Procedure Code has been filed in Court today,__jii\ihic.if:V–.’._h’e$V:_
been signed by the appe!~!iaA4:?it,! ”
respondent/defendant and their re£3_pect.i§(e f
are present in the Court today. The)’/” subm’i’t’V_it:hat
appeal could be disposed off inTte;rin$ of”th.e’comipromise
petition. It is stated in’ cc–‘_mp’ro”n1-isle.”petition that they
have volu sett?-ied “their disp’ut’es.
2. Acc.ord.inVr_ijly’,’V’t.h’e».a.ppea| is allowed.
.ju”dgment and decree passed in O.S.
*2_Nq;34ooz2«oo2fdated 14.7.2005 by the xv Addl. City Civil
V’ T”‘p§.¢ti.t_ic}In.
it Msu
addé.Sessioi§s–:_Ju=doe, Bangalore City, is set aside.
j 4″. fippeal is disposed off in terms of the compromise
sa/-5
iuciéé
‘- ‘ ‘9 .A.”.’£nc…v*””‘;»’.4n~.,_ mm’