AND
1. M/s. Green Orchards Farm House,
No.10/1. Lakshrninarayana Complex.
Ground Floor. Palace Road.
Bar1galore~560 052.
Rep. by R2 and 4 partner.
2. Sri P Dayananda Pai.
S/o late Narasirnha Pai,
Age: 61 years,
No. 10/ 1, Lakshrninarayana Comp.i,ex., 'V
Grund Floor, Palace Road.
Bar1galore--»56O 052. H " '
3. Sri P Salish Pail {I V
S / 0 late N arasi'na}i'aA
Age: 59 yea1's,f "
No. 10/ 1, Lakshmilnarayafia '
Ground Floor, Pal.aee,Road,"~ _
Bangalore--560 052:, v ' *
4. Shellojf,' ---------- -« *
S /o . late H _V Sherro_y',« .__
Age: 35 Ifearfi» ' ' --
N o . 35. " '3"''-lMai1'.:.V, Roll Layout,
P' éiipura ," Ko'ran1ar1gala,
=v._Bar1galo1'e-L360 ,O3~'3»,.--
P Bilqueesu.
V ; fW«,/o lat: Maqdoom Ali (Co--Trust,ee).
'~ ._Ag_f_e:' 38--..y'ea::s.
V'a.s§u.d_ey:i}311r21 Village,
Yelahanka Hobli,
Bangalore North Taluk,
Bangalore. Respondents
(By Sri Keerthi B M. Adv, for M/s. Karma] and Band,
Advs.. for R1 and 5)
(By Sri R Chandrashekar, Adv. for M / s. Law Park
Associates. for R2 and R3}
{By M/s. Ravi B Naik Associates, Advs, for proposed. .. __ .
aPD1icantS) I o
This Regular First Appeal is filed ui*1r,lei’–,VSeCtio;1_96 offitlie Code
of Civil Procedure, against the order datedi _1¥.L.1″]_.2008’passed in O S
No.-496/2008 on the file of ACCJ. B-,a’ng’alore. decreeing the
suit in view of the compromise in te;rmst-tne_cio.n:prornise petition.
Misc.Cvl. No.14555:/20ifijdilsliiiled ora§i~1 Rule 10 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, ‘to? ;.plerm_it._the’ applicants to come on
record as responderiIf’N’os.:6~&_j
These cases.v,coVn1,ivng’O;n.._fo–rCOrders—-l:lf2.i.€i day, the Court delivered
the following: H _
This AI3Dealv”ClS,ddi7il¢il’lli’;d\e;f..:~7Se(:tion 96 of the Code of Civil
Procedure Vffialledrlgiéng j_u_dgn1ent and decree dated 14.11.2008
made. f2Z0_C)8 on the file of City Civil Judge, Bangalore
iiztlvevd by appellant No.1 (defendant. No.2). The
appellant l\lo”.2 about 1 1 years (defendant. No.8} and appellant
is delendani. No. l.
E
V,-
6. Since the Appeal is not pressed, there cannot be any good
ground to reject the memo.
7. Sri M S Rajendra Prasad. learned Senior Counsel, appearing
for respondent No.2/minor, submits that. liberty may ptfc-;_
defendant. No.2 to prefer the Appeal challenging K V’
judgment and decree.
8. Since the Appeal it.sel.f…:is–.. the irnpleading
application registered does not survive
for consideration. _ ;_ ._
9. in t.he,resuAlt;j.the’iAppeal=.is dis–mis’sed as not pressed, mth
liberty to the C:gUl’t’ –.g:ft’.a:j’pelllant No.2 to take appropriate
course of action. int;4he_inte_reslt iappellarit No.2. in aeeo1’dance with
law.’Ar.:co1’di.::tglSz,’~lVIisc.CVl. l;fl~555/2010 is disposed off.
Sd/e
RIDGE