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 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

The Krantiveer Sangolli Rayanna ... vs Ramappa Pandappa Pammar, Age 37 Years, ... on 7 August, 2017

Author: K.Somashekar

Bench: K.Somashekar

                          :1:



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  DHARWAD BENCH

           ON THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017

                       BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR

              MFA NO.23602/2010 (CPC)

BETWEEN

1.   THE KRANTIVEER SANGOLLI RAYANNA
     RESIDENTIAL HIGH SCHOOL TRUST
     TRUST REGISTRATION E 494 (BGM)
     NEHRU NAGAR, BELGAUM-590010

2.   REVAPPA HANJAPPA LAMANI,
     AGE 67 YEARS, OCC CHAIRMAN
     THE KRANTIVEER SANGOLLI RAYANNA
     RESIDENTIAL HIGH SCHOOL TRUST
     R/O.SALAPUR TANDA-591 123
     TQ.RAMDURG, BELGAUM

3.   SHRI MEGAPPA MANNAPPA LAMANI,
     AGE 45 YEARS, OCC VICE CHAIRMAN
     KRANTIVEER SANGOLLI RAYANNA
     RESIDENTIAL HIGH SCHOOL TRUST
     R/O.SALAPUR TANDA-591 123
     TQ.RAMDURG, BELGAUM

4.   SHRI SHETTEPPA REVAPPA LAMANI,
     AGE 35 YEARS, OCC AGRIL,
     R/O.SALAPUR TANDA-591 123
     TQ RAMDURG, BELGAUM
                                        ... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI.M.G.NAGANURI, ADVOCATE)
                            :2:



AND

1.    SHRI RAMAPPA PANDAPPA PAMMAR,
      AGE 37 YEARS, OCC COOLIE,
      R/O.NEW VAIBHAV NAGAR-591 010
      BELGAUM

2.    SHRI SUBHASH SHANKAR PAMMAR
      AGE 40 YEARS, OCC PVT SERIC
      R/O.BAHER GALLI, KARGRALI BK-591123
      TQ & DIST BELGAUM

3.    SHRI LAXMAN PANDAPPA LAMANI,
      AGE 32 YEARS, OCC:COOLIE,
      R/O.BANNUR TAND-591 123
      RQ RAMDURG, DIST BELGAUM

4.    SHRI FAKIRAPPA S/O.KARIYAPPA HALAGI,
      AGE 60 YEARS, OCC TRUSTEE &
      MANAGING COMMITTEE MEMBER,
      THE KRANTIVEER SANGOLLI RAYANNA
      RESIDENTIAL HIGH SCHOOL TRUST
      R/O.CHULAKI-591 110
      TQ.SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELGAUM

5.    SHRI DURGAPPA YALLAPPA CHALWADI,
      AGE 65 YEARS, OCC TRUSTEE &
      MANAGING COMMITTEE MEMBER,
      THE KRANTIVEER SANGOLLI RAYANNA
      RESIDENTIAL HIGH SCHOOL TRUST
      R/O.hIREKUMBI-591 110
      TQ.SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELGAUM

6.    SHRI HANAMANT BHIMAPPA MADAR,
      AGE 65 YEARS, OCC TRUSTEE &
      MANAGING COMMITTEE MEMBER,
      THE KRANTIVEER SANGOLLI RAYANNA
      RESIDENTIAL HIGH SCHOOL TRUST
      R/O.SALAPUR-591 110
      TQ.SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELGAUM
                                         ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.NEELENDRA D.GUNDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R6;
 SRI.DINESH M.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R6)
                                 :3:



      THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.43 RULE 1(s) R/W. SEC.104
CPC., 1908, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER ON
I.A.NOS.II  AND    III  DATED:26-07-2010,   PASSED   IN
O.S.NO.5/2008, ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.DISTRICT JUDGE,
BELGAUM, REJECTING THE I.A.NO.II, FILED U/O.39 RULES 1
AND 2 OF CPC., AND ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.III FILED U/O.40
RULE 1 OF CPC.

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

                           JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Brief facts of the appeal are as under:

On 23.09.2008, an application in I.A.No.II was filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC by the plaintiffs- Ramappa and two others for an order of temporary injunction restraining the second defendant from acting as Chirman-Trustee and other defendants as Trustees and Managing Committee members of the first defendant Trust, pending disposal of the suit. Whereas on 25.09.2008, an application in I.A.No.III was filed under Order XL Rule 1 of CPC by the plaintiff for appointing the Deputy Director of Public Instructions, Belgaum as receiver of the first :4: defendant-Trust to manage the administration and financial affairs of the said Trust, pending disposal of the suit.

3. However, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the respondents submit that the suit in O.S.No.5/2008 came to be dismissed for non-prosecution on 21.07.2011.

4. Therefore, keeping in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants and the respondents and so also the dismissal of the suit in O.S.No.5/2008 for non-prosecution, it is said that this appeal does not survive for consideration.

Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE Vnp*