N Gowtham S/O K Narayanaswamy vs M/S Megacity (Bangalore) on 1 March, 2017

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

N Gowtham S/O K Narayanaswamy vs M/S Megacity (Bangalore) on 1 March, 2017

Bench: B.Sreenivase Gowda

                           1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH, 2017

                        BEFORE


 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

            R.S.A. NO.913/2013 [SP & DEC]

BETWEEN:

N. GOWTHAM,
S/O. K. NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,
NO.89, HOSAKEREHALLI,
B.S.K. III STAGE,
BANGALORE - 560 085.
                                         ... APPELLANT

       (By SRI. L. M. RAMAIAH GOWDA, ADV.)

AND:

1.     M/S. MEGACITY (BANGALORE)
       DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,
       NO.120, KENGAL HANUMANTHAIAH ROAD,
       MEGA TOWERS,
       BANGALORE - 27,
       REPRESENTED BY ITS
       MANAGING DIRECTOR,
       C. P. YOGESHWAR.

2.     C. P. YOGESHWAR,
       MANAGING DIRECTOR,
       M/S. MEGACITY (BANGALORE),
                             2


     DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,
     MEGA TOWERS NO 120,
     KENGAL HANUMANTHAIAH ROAD,
     BANGALORE - 560 027.
                                 ... RESPONDENTS

     THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE
JUDGEMENT & DECREE DATED 21.02.2013 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.66/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING
OFFICER,    FAST    TRACK    COURT,    RAMANAGARA,
DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE
JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.3.2008 PASSED IN
OS.NO.228/2006 THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE
(SR.DN) RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                   JUDGMENT

Appellant's Counsel submits, this appeal is by the plaintiff challenging the judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below in so far as disallowing his claim for the relief of specific performance and decreeing the suit for refund of advance sale consideration.

As per the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court and confirmed by the first appellate Court 3 defendant - respondent has deposited the advance sale consideration before the trial Court in O.S.No.228/2006. The plaintiff - appellant has filed a memo before the trial Court in O.S.No.228/2006 agreeing to withdraw the amount and further stating that he would not pursue the above appeal. Thereby he submits, appeal may be dismissed as settled out of Court by ordering refund of Court fee. A memo signed by the appellant as well as the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant is filed to that effect.

Memo is taken on record.

Accordingly, appeal is dismissed as settled out of Court.

Permissible Court fee is ordered to be refunded to the appellant.

Registry is directed to return the LCR to the trial Court forthwith in order to enable the appellant to 4 withdraw the advance sale consideration deposited by the respondent.

SD/-

JUDGE Mgn/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court