Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 49179 (KAR)

M/S MJR BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. SRI B K PADMANABHA REDDY

RFA/542/2021 · 2025-09-16

Anu Sivaraman, Rajesh Rai K

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37463-DB RFA No. 542 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 542 OF 2021 (MON) BETWEEN: M/S MJR BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT No.54, 2ND FLOOR, 17TH CROSS 12TH MAIN, 6TH SECTOR, HSR LAYOUT BENGALURU-560 102 REP BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI MADHU TALAMARLA. …APPELLANT (BY SRI B. PRAMOD, ADV.) AND: 1. SRI B.K. PADMANABHA REDDY S/O LATE B.M. KRISHNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS. 2. SMT. JAYALAKSHMI REDDY W/O LATE B.M. KRISHNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS. Digitally signed by CHANNEGOWDA PREMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37463-DB RFA No. 542 of 2021 3. MRS. SHWETHA D/O B.K. PADMANABHA REDDY AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. ALL ARE RESIDING AT No.79 NEW THIPPASANDRA POST BENGALURU - 560 075. ALSO AT No.74/1, BELLANDHUR RING ROAD, VARTHUR BANGALORE EAST TALUK BENGALURU - 560 037. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B. RAMESH, ADV, FOR R-1) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC 1908 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 14.08.2020 PASSED IN OS.No.8071/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE XIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37463-DB RFA No. 542 of 2021 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) Learned counsel appearing on either side submit that matter has been settled. A memo dated 15.09.2025 seeking withdrawal of the appeal has also been filed by the learned counsel for the appellant. The memo is signed by the appellant as well. The appeal is therefore, dismissed as withdrawn. The admissible Court fee shall be refunded to the appellant on proper identification. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41