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 2, Cited by 4]

Karnataka High Court

Smt.Lakshmamma vs Sri.B.H.Ramegowda on 21 February, 2019

Author: S.Sujatha

Bench: S. Sujatha

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019

                       BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA

         WRIT PETITION No.20/2018 (GM CPC)

BETWEEN:
SMT.LAKSHMAMMA,
W/O MRUTHYUNJAYA CHARI,
AGED 62 YEARS,
RESIDING AT
BEERAGANAHALLI VILLAGE,
YEDIUR HOBLI,
KUNIGAL TALUK-572130
TUMKUR DISTRICT.                         ... PETITIONER

           (BY SRI P M SIDDAMALLAPPA, ADV.)

AND:
1.     SRI B.H.RAMEGOWDA,
       S/O HONNE GOWDA,
       AGED 70 YEARS,
       RESIDING AT
       BEERAGANAHALLI VILLAGE,
       YEDIUR HOBLI,
       KUNIGAL TALUK-572130
       TUMKUR DISTRICT.

2.     SMT. SAROJAMMA
       W/O UGRAPPA,
       AGED 60 YEARS,
       RESIDING AT
       CHIKKA MADURE VILLAGE,
       YEDIUR HOBLI,
       KUNIGAL TALUK-572130
       TUMKUR DISTRICT.               ... RESPONDENTS

          (BY SRI M GUNDAPPA, ADV. FOR C/R1.)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
                              2


ORDER PASSED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE COURT I.E., THE
CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION COURT AT KUNIGAL IN
M.A.29/15 CLUBBED WITH M.A.1/16 DTED 23.10.2017 AT
ANNEX-A AND CONSEQUENTLY CONFIRM THE ORDER OF
INJUNCTION GRANTED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE JUNIOR
DIVISION COURT AT KUNIGAL IN O.S.239/2015 VIDE ORDER
DATED 3.12.2015 VIDE ANNEX-B ETC.

      THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                        ORDER

This writ petition is filed against the order dated 03.12.2015 on I.A.No.1 in O.S.No.239/2015 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC at Kunigal ['Trial Court' for short].

2. It is discerned that the said O.S.No.239/2015 has been disposed of by the Trial Court and hence, writ petition does not survive for consideration.

In view of the aforesaid, writ petition stands dismissed as having rendered infructuous.

Sd/-

JUDGE NC CT-HR