- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15863 CRP No. 265 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 265 OF 2021 BETWEEN: 1. SMT DHANALAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE DASAPPA, AGED 75 YEARS 2. SMT. BHAGYAVATHI W/O LATE CHANDRAMOULI AGED 45 YEARS, 3. SMT. LAVANYA D/O LATE CHANDRAMOULI AGED 25 YEARS 4. SMT. ASHWINI D/O LATE CHANDRAMOULI AGED 20 YEARS 5. SRI SUSHEN KUMAR S/O LATE ARUN KUMAR AGED 26 YEARS 6. SRI SULAKSHAN KUMAR S/O LATE ARUN KUMAR AGED 24 YEARS 7. SRI GIRISH N D S/O LATE DASAPPA AGED 47 YEARS Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15863 CRP No. 265 of 2021 8. SMT. KALAVATHI D/O LATE DASAPPA AGED 47 YEARS, 9. SMT. SUSHEELA D/O LATE DASAPPA AGED 39 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.80, KOTUR, MUTHASANDRA POST VIA VARTHUR, HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU - 560 087 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. M.R. RAJAGOPAL., SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. BINU M., & SRI. V. AJAY KUMAR., ADVOCATES) AND: 1. SRI VENKATASWAMY S/O LATE DODDA THAYAPPA @ MUNISWAMY AGED 60 YEARS, 2. SMT. AKKAYAMMA D/O LATE DODDA THAYAPPA @ MUNISWAMY AGED 55 YEARS, 3. SMT. SALAMMA W/O LATE DODDA ANNAYYA AGED 42 YEARS, 4. SMT. LAKSHMANA S/O LATE DODD ANNAYYA AGED 29 YEARS, 5. SMT. AKLAMMA D/O LATE DODDA ANNAYYA AGED 25 YEARS - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15863 CRP No. 265 of 2021 6. SMT. CHIKKA ANNAYYA S/O LATE DODDA THAYAPPA@MUNISWAMY AGED 53 YEARS, 7. SMT. RUKMANI D/O LATE DHORESWAMY AGED 47 YEARS, 8. SMT. RADHAMMA D/O LATE DHORESWAMY AGED 45 YEARS, 9. SRI NAGABHUSHAN S/O LATE DHORESWAMY AGED 42 YEARS, 10. SRI SRINIVAS S/O LATE DHORESWAMY AGED 38 YEARS, 11. SRI MURALI S/O LATE DHORESWAMY AGED 36 YEARS, 12. SMT. MANJULA S/O LATE DHORESWAMY AGED 34 YEARS, 13. SRI MUNIRAJU D/O LATE CHIKKATHAYAPPA AGED 65 YEARS 14. SMT. SARASWATHI D/O LATE CHIKKATHAYAPPA AGED 56 YEARS, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15863 CRP No. 265 of 2021 15. SMT. BHAGYA S/O LATE CHIKKATHAYAPPA AGED 50 YEARS, 16. SMT. MUNILAKSHMI D/O LATE CHIKKATHAYAPPA AGED 45 YEARS, 17. SRI VENKATSWAMY S/O LATE VADDARA MUNIDASAPPA AGED 85 YEARS, 18. SMT. PUTTAMMA W/O VENKATSWAMY AGED 80 YEARS, 1 TO 18 ARE ALL R/AT NAYANAPPANA HALLI VILLAGE BEGURU HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU - 560 068 19. SRI H R RAVICHANDRA S/O LATE RAJASHEKAR REDDY AGED 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.551, 16TH A MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANAGALA BENGALURU - 560 034 20. SRI G PRASAD REDDY S/O G SRINIVAS REDDY, AGED 54 YEARS, 21. SRI P VISHWAS S/O G PRASAD REDDY AGED 24 YEARS, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15863 CRP No. 265 of 2021 22. SMT. KASTHURI AGED 60 YEARS, W/O DR KRISHNA REDDY R/AT NO.748, 18TH MAIN, 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU - 560 095 23. SRI KIRAN K S/O LATE G KRISHNA REDDY AGED 30 YEARS, R/AT NO. 551, 16TH A MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU - 560 034 ALSO AT NO.9/2-2 1ST FLOOR, PURSHOTHAM LAYOUT, SBIR ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 BEHIND INDIA GARAGE ST MARKS ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001 24. HIRANANDANI TOWNSHIP PVT LTD OLYMPIA, HIRANANDANI BUSINESS PARK POWAI, MUMBAI - 400 076 REP BY MANAGING DIRECTOR SURENDRA HIRANANDANI ALSO AT NO. 757/6, 100 FT ROAD, HAL 2ND STAGE, INDIRANAGAR BENGALURU - 38 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.R.A. CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY., ADVOCATE FOR R19 & R22 R24 SERVED-UNREPRESENTED V/O/D 21.04.2022, NOTICE TO R1 TO R18, R20, R21 & R23 IS D/W) - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15863 CRP No. 265 of 2021 THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18.08.2021 PASSED ON IA No.7 IN OS.No.436/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU , ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(b) OF CPC FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER This Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Section 115 of the CPC calling in question the impugned order dated 18.08.2021 passed by the learned IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, rejecting the plaint, while allowing the application in I.A.No.7 filed by the defendant No.24 under Order VII Rule 11(b) of CPC. When a plaint is rejected, the remedy for the plaintiffs will be to file an Appeal questioning the order since such an order puts an end to the suit itself. Therefore, a Civil Revision Petition is not maintainable. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:15863 CRP No. 265 of 2021 2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the Civil Revision Petition and file an Appeal. However, it is also requested that the time spent by the petitioners before this Court in this Civil Revision Petition should be taken into consideration if an appeal is filed. 3. Placing the submission of the learned Senior Counsel on record, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, while reserving liberty to the petitioners to file an Appeal. If an appeal is filed, the time spent by the petitioners before this Court in this Civil Revision Petition shall be taken into consideration for the purpose of computation of limitation. 4. Office to return the original/certified copies, if any, after taking the photocopies for the file. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE DL/JT CT: JL