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 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

H.K. Prakash vs Sudhakar Bhandary S on 6 February, 2018

                           1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

   DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018

                       BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

            M.F.A.NO.1344 OF 2017 (CPC)

BETWEEN:

H.K.Prakash
S/o H.T.Kempaiah
Aged about 46 years
Proprietor of Shree
Devi Enterprises
R/at No.2, "Sridevi"
Health Layout
Annapoorneshwarinagar
Vishwaneedam Post
Bengaluru - 560 091                   ...Appellant

(By Sri Lokesh S G, Advocate)

AND:

1. Sudhakar Bhandary S
   S/o Saaja Marappa Bhandary
   Aged about 60 years
   Proprietor of Saaja Productions
   R/at No.10/A, Sharada Nilaya
   Ahimsa Marga, Siddarthanagar
   Bengaluru - 560 011

2. Udaya TV Private Ltd.,
   A Company registered under
   The Companies Act
                             2


  Represented by its CEO
  Vijayanagar
  Having office at
  No.9, Maron, Maran Towers
  Brunton Road
  Craig Park Layout
  Ashok Nagar, Bengaluru
  Bengaluru - 560 025

3. Sun Network
   Sun TV Limited
   A Company Registered under
   The Companies Act
   Represented by its
   President-Sri Selvam
   No.367/369, Anna Salai
   Teynampet, Chennai-600018               ... Respondents

(By Alka Tripathi, Advocate for
Sri Ajay J Nandalike, Advocate for C/R1)

     This MFA is filed under Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the
Code of Civil Procedure, against the order dated
22.10.2016 passed on IA No.I in O.S.No.6183/2016 on
the file of the LXII Additional City Civil and Sessions
Judge (CCH-63), Bengaluru allowing IA No.1 filed under
Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the
Code of Civil Procedure.

     This appeal coming on for hearing-interlocutory
application this day, the Court made the following:
                             3


                         ORDER

The counsel for respondent No.1 files a memo stating that in the original suit, the parties have arrived at a compromise. The compromise petition is also enclosed.

Therefore, placing this memo on record, this appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous.

Sd/-

JUDGE KMV/-