- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38366 RP No. 186 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ REVIEW PETITION NO. 186 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT. S SULOCHANA D/O LATE. VENKATASUBBACHAR AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/A NO. 26, NEW NO. 51, 3RD CROSS, CUBBONPETE, BANGALORE-560002. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M. R. RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ANANTHANARAYANA K. S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SACHIDANANDASWAMY S/O LATE. MADAIAH AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/A NO. 668, 45TH CROSS, 8TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560082. 2. GOWDARA ANNAIYAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR.S RUDRAMMA W/O LATE. GOWDARA ANNAIYAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HER LR.S RAMAPPA @ RAMANNA S/O LATE GOWDARA ANNAIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38366 RP No. 186 of 2025 3. HANUMANTHAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LR.S AKKAYAMMA W/O LATE. HANUMANTHAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HER LR.S LAKSHMU AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 4. YESHODAMMA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, 5. ANJANI AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS. 6. RADHA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 6 ARE THE CHILDREN OF LATE. HANUMANTHAPPA ALL ARE R/A KADIRENAHALLI VILLAGE, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE-560062. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NITISH, ADV. FOR SRI. K.V. NARASIMHAN, ADV. FOR R1, SRI. C. H. RAMACHANDRA REDDY, ADV. FOR R3 TO R6, V/O DATED.18/09/2025, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH.) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.114 R/W ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC 1908, PRAYING TO GRANT A REVIEW OF THE ORDER DATED 22.11.2024 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP NO.1192/2018 C/W 5818/2019 AND 6951/2020 (GM CPC). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38366 RP No. 186 of 2025 ORAL ORDER This petition is filed for review of the order dated 22.11.2024 passed in WP No.5818 of 2019. After hearing the learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondents, this Court is of the opinion that the observations made at paragraph 2, at page 10 of the order, is just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and there is no need to review it. However, if the petitioner and legal representatives of respondent No.6, have any inter se dispute, they may seek adjudication of the same independently in an appropriate proceeding before the appropriate Court. The review petition stands disposed of with the above observation. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE BH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38366 RP No. 186 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU [SMT S SULOCHANA VS. SACHIDANANDASWAMY AND OTHERS] 17.10.2025 (VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER ON 'FOR BEING SPOKEN TO' This petition is moved by the learned counsel for the petitioner 'for being spoken to'. It is stated that while disposing off this review petition vide order dated 23.09.2025, this Court, instead of referring to the petitioner and the legal representatives of respondent No.6 in W.P.No.5818/2019, had referred to the petitioner and the legal representatives of respondent No.6 in the review petition. Hence, it is prayed that the reference to the petitioner and respondent No.6 in the order dated 23.09.2025 be corrected and shown as “the petitioner and legal representatives of respondent No.6 in W.P.No.5818/2019.” After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is ordered that the reference to the petitioner and the legal - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38366 RP No. 186 of 2025 representatives of respondent No.6 in paragraph No.3 of the order dated 23.09.2025 shall be read as: “the petitioner and legal representatives of respondent No.6 in W.P.No.5818/2019.” This order shall be read in conjunction with the order dated 23.09.2025. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1