- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15685-DB RFA No. 1076 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1076 OF 2020 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: MR. JAYANTH S, S/O GANAPATHI JOGI, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT THIRUVAIL, VAMANJOOR POST, MANGALORE D K-575028. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RANJAN KUMAR K, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. VAMAN, S/O THIMAPPA POOJARY, AGED 40 YEARS, R/AT D NO.2/32, SALEPADAVU, MOODUSHEDDE VILLAGE, MANGALURU TALUK - 575 028. 2. MRS. VANISHREE, W/O JAYANTH S, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, THIRUVAIL, VAMANJOOR POST, MANGALORE TALUK, D K - 575 028. Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15685-DB RFA No. 1076 of 2020 3. NAVEEN D'SOUZA S/O HENRY D'SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT RUTH VILLA, D NO.3-112/49, BAJJODI, BIKARNAKATTA, KULASHEKAR, MANGALURU - 575 002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY, ADVOCATE FOR R3 (ABSENT)); R1 AND R2 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 24.11.2018 PASSED IN OS NO.9/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE IST ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE MANGALURU D.K. PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 24.11.2018 passed by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada in O.S.No.9/2015. 2. Sri. Ranjan Kumar., learned counsel appearing for the appellant is present before the Court physically and submits that he has filed a memo dated 08.04.2025 seeking permission - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15685-DB RFA No. 1076 of 2020 of this Court to withdraw this appeal. The said memo reads as under: "The Appellant in the above case, has settled the above matter with the respondent No.1 and therefore, the Appeal do not survive for consideration. In view of the same, the above case may be dismissed as withdrawn, in the interest of justice and equity." 3. The said memo is taken on record. 4. Keeping in view the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant and the memo, it is deemed appropriate that the appellant be permitted to withdraw this appeal as sought for. 5. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 6. Consequent upon disposal of this appeal, pending I.A's if any, are also disposed of. Sd/- (K.SOMASHEKAR) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5 CT: BHK