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 0]

Karnataka High Court

K Venkatanarayana Sharma vs K Nagarathna on 19 August, 2024

Author: R Devdas

Bench: R Devdas

                                               -1-
                                                            NC: 2024:KHC:33159
                                                           WP No. 9567 of 2020




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                           DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
                                            BEFORE

                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS

                           WRIT PETITION NO. 9567 OF 2020 (GM-CPC)

                   BETWEEN:

                   K. VENKATANARAYANA SHARMA
                   SON OF LATE. K.V.KRISHNAN,
                   AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
                   R/AT, GROUND FLOOR,
                   NEW NO.30 (OLD NO.13),
                   GUPTA LAYOUT, 1ST CROSS, ULSOOR,
                   BANGALORE - 560 008.

                   REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY,
                   HOLDER MRS. T.S.KOUSALYA.
                                                                  ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI. SUNDARA RAMAN M. V., ADVOCATE)
                   AND:

                   1.    K. NAGARATHNA
Digitally signed         WIFE OF LATE. K.R.SUBRAMANYAM,
by JUANITA               AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
THEJESWINI
                         R/AT, HOUSE NO.1186, 9TH BLOCK,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF                 JAYANAGAR, 26TH MAIN,
KARNATAKA                BANGALORE - 560 011.

                   2.    K. PREMA
                         WIFE OF LATE. A.VENKATESH,
                         AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
                         R/AT NO.42/1,
                         EAST ANJANEYA TEMPLE STREET,
                         BASAVANAGUDI,
                         BANGALORE - 560 004.
                            -2-
                                       NC: 2024:KHC:33159
                                      WP No. 9567 of 2020




3.   K. BHANUMATI
     WIFE OF R.KAILASAM,
     AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
     R/AT NO.171, ITTINA APARTMENT,
     ELECTRONIC CITY,
     BANGALORE - 560 100.

4.   K.RAJESHWARI
     WIFE OF S.KUMAR,
     AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
     R/AT FIRST FLOOR (FRONT PORTION),
     NEW NO.30, (OLD NO.13), GUPTA LAYOUT,
     1ST CROSS, ULSOOR,
     BANGALORE - 560 008.

5.   K.SANTOSH
     SON OF S.KUMAR,
     AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
     R/AT FIRST FLOOR (FRONT PORTION),
     NEW NO.30 (OLD NO.13), GUPTA LAYOUT,
     1ST CROSS, ULSOOR,
     BANGALORE - 560 008.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE FOR R4 AND R5;
         R1 AND R2 SERVED - UNREPRESENTED)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 26.06.2020 PASSED BY THE LXXIII ADDITIONAL
CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYO HALL UNIT,
BANGALORE (CCH-74) IN O.S.NO.25726 OF 2012 (ANNEXURE-
A) ON THE INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION (UNNUMBERED)
DATED 27.02.2019 FILED BY THE R-4 AND 5 UNDER ORDER
XVI RULE 6 R/W SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE, 1908 DIRECTING THE PLAINTIFF TO PRODUCE
ALLEGED ORIGINAL WILL DATED 20.05.2002 AND ETC.,

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
                               -3-
                                           NC: 2024:KHC:33159
                                        WP No. 9567 of 2020




CORAM:       HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS


                         ORAL ORDER

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the original suit from out of which the present writ petition arises viz., O.S.No.25726/2012 has been disposed of on 06.07.2023 and therefore, the prayer made in the petition has become infructuous. Learned Counsel would therefore submit that the writ petition may be permitted to be withdrawn.

2. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is placed on record.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, since the prayer made in the writ petition has become infructuous.

Sd/-

(R DEVDAS) JUDGE JT/-

CT:PH