Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Annamma J Vithayathil vs Dr. Joseph Vithayathil @ Jose ... on 16 December, 2025

Author: H.P.Sandesh

Bench: H.P.Sandesh

                                               -1-
                                                            NC: 2025:KHC:53422
                                                             TOS No. 1 of 2025


                   HC-KAR




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

                                            BEFORE

                             THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

                          TESTAMENTORY ORIGINAL SUIT NO.1 OF 2025

                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    ANNAMMA J. VITHAYATHIL,
                         WIFE OF LATE JOSEPH VITHAYATHIL,
                         AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS,
                         RESIDING AT NO.57,
                         HICKORY BEND DRIVE
                         CABOT, ARKANSAS, USA.

                         SINCE DECEASED AND REPRESENTED BY LEGAL
                         REPRESENTATIVE BEING PETITIONER NO.2 AND
                         RESPONDENT.

                         (AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 28.02.2023)

                   2.    MARY VERGHESE EDATTUKARAN,
Digitally signed         DAUGHTER OF LATE JOSEPH VITHAYATHIL,
by DEVIKA M
                         AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
Location: HIGH           RESIDING AT NO.57,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA                HICKORY BEND DRIVE,
                         CABOT, ARKANSAS, USA.
                                                                  ...PLAINTIFFS

                                (BY SMT. SANJANA RAO, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.    DR. JOSEPH VITHAYATHIL @ JOSE VITHAYATHIL,
                         SON OF LATE JOSEPH VITHAYATHIL,
                         AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
                         R/AT NO.30, CHURCH STREET,
                             -2-
                                       NC: 2025:KHC:53422
                                        TOS No. 1 of 2025


HC-KAR




   BENGALURU-560 001, INDIA.
   PRESENT ADDRESS:
   ASSISTANT PROFESSOR,
   DEPT. MGMT, INFO SYS & ENTREP (MISE),
   TODD HALL 442, PO BOX 644743,
   PULLMAN, WA 991644743,
   AND REPRESENTED BY HIS
   POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
   DR. PROFESSOR ANTONY JOSEPH
   VITHAYATHIL.
                                               ...DEFENDANT

              (VIDE ORDER DATED 15.07.2024,
         NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS HELD SUFFICIENT)


     PROBATE CIVIL PETITION No.21/2014 WAS FILED UNDER
SECTION 263 OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 R/W
SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908,
PRAYING TO REVOKE AND ANNUL THE PROBATE AND SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 12.11.2013 AS PASSED BY THIS
HON'BLE     COURT    IN   PROB.C.P.NO.8/2013    PRODUCED
HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.


     THIS COURT VIDE ORDER DATED 31.10.2025 ALLOWED
THE PROBATE CIVIL PETITION AND DIRECTED THE REGISTRY
TO CONVERT PROBATE CIVIL PETITION AS TOS. THIS TOS IS
POSTED BEFORE THE COURT FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF
OFFICE OBJECTION.


     TOS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
                                 -3-
                                               NC: 2025:KHC:53422
                                                TOS No. 1 of 2025


HC-KAR




CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

                         ORAL JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the plaintiffs has filed a memo stating that a letter was sent to plaintiff No.2 that she is going to retire from the case and the same is replied by plaintiff No.2 by way of e-mail stating that her mother had passed away 5 years back and Anthony passed away before. So the issue no longer exists. She does not wish to pursue this case as it is no longer relevant. Hence, the learned counsel for the plaintiffs files a memo to close the case in view of the reply.

2. The memo is taken on record and in view of the letter and reply, the case is closed, as the plaintiff is not willing to pursue the matter and no issue exists.

Sd/-

(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22