Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 32531 (KAR)

MR ANAND KARMOKAR v. MR NINGANA GOWDA HOSAMANI

MFA/4642/2018 · 2025-03-14

Hanchate Sanjeevkumar

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10626 MFA No. 4642 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4642 OF 2018 (CPC) BETWEEN: MR. ANAND KARMOKAR AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, SON OF LATE VIJAY KARMOKAR, R/AT NO.3/11, 1ST MAIN ROAD, AMCP LAYOUT, SAHAKARNAGAR, BANGALORE 560 092 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHANDRAIAH H.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. NINGANA GOWDA HOSAMANI AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, SON OF ADIVEPPA GOWDA HOSAMANI, NO.50, 1ST STAGE, POSTAL COLONY SANJAYNAGAR, BANGALORE 560 050. 2. MR. P.C. CHOWDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, SON OF LATE P. CHANDRASEKESHAVAPPA, NO.106, 4TH CROSS, 1ST STAGE , 2ND PHASE MANJUNATHANAGAR, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, BANGALURU 560 010. Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10626 MFA No. 4642 of 2018 3. MR. C.V. SRINATH AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, SON OF MR. V.N. CHOWDAPPA, NO.148, 9TH MAIN ROAD, KURUBARAHALLI, NEAR CANARA SCHOOL, JC NAGAR , MAHALAKSHMIPURAM POST, BANGALURU 560 086. 4. MRS. ZEENATHUNISA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, WIFE OF MR. RAFIQUE AHMED, NO.227, 14TH MAIN ROAD, GOKUL 1ST STAGE, 1ST PHASE, HMT LAYOUT, MATHIKERE, BANGALURU 560 054 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. UDITA RAMESH, ADVOCATE R1) THIS MFA IS FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31.05.2018, PASSED ON IA.1 IN O.S. NO.405/2018, ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-15), BENGALURU, REJECTING THE IA.1, FILED U/O.39 RULES 1 AND 2 OF CPC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10626 MFA No. 4642 of 2018 ORAL JUDGMENT Learned Counsel for the appellant has filed a memo of even date seeking to dismiss the petition on the ground that the suit has been decreed on 01.04.2023 and therefore the appeal has become infructuous. 2. Memo is taken on record. 3. In view of the memo, the appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous. 4. In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending interlocutory application does not survive for consideration and it stands disposed of. SD/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE YN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25 CT:SNN