Karnataka High Court
Smt Fatima W/O Rajab Bagawan vs Sikandar Maliksab Havali on 23 November, 2015
Author: S.N.Satyanarayana
Bench: S.N.Satyanarayana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNA TAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED TH IS THE 23 R D DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUS TICE S.N. SA TYANARAYANA
R.S .A.NO.180/2008
C/W.
R.S .A.NO.181/2008
IN RSA NO.180/2008
BETWEEN:
1. SMT FA TIMA W/O RAJAB BAGAWAN
AGED ABOUT 50 YEA RS
OCC HOUSE HOLD WORK
R/A T CTS NO .633, KALAL GALLI, A THANI
(SINCE DECEASED, REP. BY HER L .RS
APPELLANTS 2 TO 8)
2. SMT SHABIRA RAJAB BAGAWAN
AGED ABOUT 39 YEA RS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/A T KALAL GALLI, A THANI
3. SMT JARINA W/O DASTAGIR BAGWAN
AGED ABOUT 28 YEA RS, OCC: NIL
R/A T KALAL GALLI, A THANI
4. SMT RIHANA D/O RA JAB BAGWAN
AGED ABOUT 26 YEA RS
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/A T KALAL GALLI, A THANI
5. MUBARAK S/O RAJAB BAGWAN
AGED ABOUT 24 YEA RS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/A T KALAL GALLI, A THANI
2
6. ASLAM S/O RAJAB BAGWAN
AGED ABOUT 22 YEA RS
7. AYUB S/O RAJAB BAGWAN
AGED ABOUT 20 YEA RS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/A T KALAL GALLI, A THANI
8. FIROZKHAN S/O RAJAB BAGWAN
AGED ABOUT 18 YEA RS, OCC: NIL
R/A T KALAL GALLI, A THANI
.. APPELLANTS
(BY SRI M.G .NAGANURI, ADVOCATE.)
AND:
1. SIKANDAR MALIKSAB HAVALI
AGED ABOUT 45 YEA RS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/A T A THANI, D IST: BELGAUM
(SINCE DECEASED, BY HIS L.R .,
RESPONDENT NO.2 .)
2. ALLABAKSH MALIKSAB HAVALI
AGED ABOUT 43 YEA RS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE
RA/T A THANI, D IST: BELGAUM
3. SMT BATU LA W/O MALIKSAB HAVALI
AGED ABOUT 42 YEA RS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/A T A THANI, D IST: BELGAUM
4. SMT MADINA W/O ISMAIL PA TVEGER
AGED ABOUT 40 YEA RS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/A T A THANI, D IST: BELGAUM
5. SMT SHABBIRA W/O SHOUKATSAB SAHAID
AGED ABOUT 38 YEA RS,
3
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/A T A THANI, D IST: BELGAUM
.. RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K.H.BAGI, ADVOCATE, FOR R.2 TO R.5.)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINS T THE JUDGEMENT AND
DECREE DATED 17.12.2007, PASSED IN
R.A.NO.3/2003, ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE
(SR.DN.) , A THANI, D ISMISSING THE APPEA L F ILED
AGAINST TH E JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DA TED
04.10.2002 PASSED IN O.S .NO.176/1994, ON THE F ILE
OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC, A THANI,
ETC.,.
IN RSA NO.181/2008
BETWEEN:
1. SMT FA TIMA W/O .RAJAB BAGAWAN
AGED ABOUT 58 YEA RS,
OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. KALAL GALLI, A THANI.
(SINCE DECEASED, BY HER L .RS.,
APPELLANTS 2 TO 7 AND RESPONDENT NO.6 .)
2. SMT SHABIRA RAJAB BAGAWAN
AGED ABOUT 56 YEA RS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O.KALAL GALLI, A THANI,
(SINCE DECEASED, BY HER L .RS.,
APPELLANTS 1, 3 TO 6 AND RESPONDENT NO.6.)
3. SMT JARINA W/O DASTAGIR BAGWAN
AGED ABOUT 36 YEA RS, OCC: NIL,
R/O.KALAL GALLI, A THANI,
4. SMT RIHANA D/O RA JAB BAGAWAN
AGED ABOUT 34 YEA RS,
4
OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O.KALAL GALLI, A THANI,
5. MUBARAK S/O RAJAB BAGAWAN
AGED ABOUT 32 YEA RS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O.KALAL GALLI, A THANI,
6. AYUB S/O RAJAB BAGAWAN
AGED ABOUT 28 YEA RS, OCC:BUSINESS ,
R/O.KALAL GALLI, A THANI,
7. FIROZKHAN S/O RAJAB BAGAWAN
AGED ABOUT 26 YEA RS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O.KALAL GALLI, A THANI.
.. APPELLANTS
(BY SRI M.G .NAGANURI, ADOVCATE.)
AND:
1. SIKANDAR MALIKSAB HAVALI
AGED ABOUT 45 YEA RS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O.A THANI, DIS T: BELGAUM.
(SINCE DECEASED, BY HIS L.R .,
RESPONDENT NO.2 .)
2. ALLABAKSH MALIKSAB HAVALI
AGED ABOUT 43 YEA RS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O.A THANI, DIS T: BELGAUM.
3. SMT BATU LA W/O MALLIKSAB HAVALI
AGED ABOUT 42 YEA RS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O.A THANI, DIS T: BELGAUM.
4. SMT MADINA W/O ISMAIL PA TAVEGAR
AGED ABOUT 40 YEA RS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O.A THANI, DIS T: BELGAUM.
5
5. SMT SHABBIRA W/O SHOUKATSAB SAHAID
AGED ABOUT 38 YEA RS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O.A THANI, DIS T: BELGAUM.
6. ASLAM S/O RAJAB BAGAWAN
AGED ABOUT 30 YEA RS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O.A THANI, DIS T: BELGAUM.
.. RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K H BAGI, ADVOCATE, FOR R.2 TO R.5.)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINS T THE JUDGEMENT &
DECREE DATED 17.12.2007, PASSED IN
R.A.NO.100/2005, ON THE F ILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE
(SR.DN), ATHANI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED
AGAINST TH E JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
28.9.2005, PASSED IN O .S.NO .756/2002, ON THE FILE
OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC, ATHANI,
ETC.,.
THESE APPEA LS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
These two appeals are filed by common set of appellants, who are plaintiffs in O.S.No.176/1994 and defendants in O.S.No.756/2002, on the file of Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Athani. Both the suits are with reference to tenancy rights of appellants herein in respect of property bearing CTS No.633 of Athani. The suit which was filed by the 6 appellants in RSA No.180/2008 is dismissed and confirmed in R.A.No.3/2003, whereas the suit filed against the appellants herein in RSA No.181/2008 is decreed against them which order is taken up in appeal in R.A.No.100/2005. The order of eviction is confirmed which is under challenge in RSA No.181/2008.
2. When these appeals are at the stage of admission, the appellants in both the appeals have filed a memo stating that the appellants are not pursuing both the appeals in RSA Nos.180 and 181 of 2008 and that they would accept the order of eviction passed against them in O.S.No.756/2002, confirmed in R.A.No.100/2005 and they would also accept the order of dismissal of their suit in O.S.No.176/1994, which judgment is confirmed in R.A.No.3/2003 and presently pending in RSA No.180/2008.
7
3. The said memo is signed by all the appellants except two appellants i.e., appellants 1 and 2 who are dead and the memo is accompanied by an affidavit of undertaking executed by the 7 t h appellant in RS No.180/2008 and 6 t h a ppellant in RSA No.181/2008, who is present before the Court and whose signature is taken on the order sheet, wherein it is clearly accepted by him that if six months time is granted in their favour, they would be voluntarily vacating the suit schedule property in favour of respondents in both the appeals and that they would not induct any third parties into the suit property and that they would not seek any equity either for extension of time or modification of the order at any stage.
4. The memo along with affidavit filed by them is taken on record. The submission of the learned counsel on behalf of the parties is accepted and the learned counsel for the 8 respondents would submit that on the last date of hearing the respondents who were present before the Court had expressed this arrangement before this Court and the Court has taken note of the same, which is accepted and in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents for allowing this memo, the memo is taken on record.
5. These two appeals are dismissed granting six months time to the appellants herein to continue in the suit property. After expiry of six months i.e., on or before 31.5.2016, they shall vacate and deliver the vacant possession of the suit property to the respondents. With the aforesaid observation the appeals are dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Mrk/-