Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 56450 (KAR)

SRI MOHAMMED SAIFULLA v. SRI T M MUNIRAJAIAH

RFA/1405/2021 · 2025-09-16

Anu Sivaraman, Rajesh Rai K

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37062-DB RFA No. 1405 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. 1405 OF 2021 (SP) BETWEEN: SRI MOHAMMED SAIFULLA S/O MOHAMMED YOUSUFF AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/AT NO. 773, BEHIND POSPS FOOD PRODUCTS NEAR BANGALORE ENGINEERING WORKS R.T. NAGAR POST BANGALOLRE - 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. H R ANANTHA KRISHNA MURTHY.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI T M MUNIRAJAIAH S/O CHIKKAMANAVARA MUNISWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS 2. SRI ANJANAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS 3. SMT. PILLAMMA W/O LATE CHINNAKRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37062-DB RFA No. 1405 of 2021 4. SRI SRINIVAA S/O LATE CHINNAKRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 4 ARE R/AT THANISANDRA VILLAGE K.R. PURAM, HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK. 5. SRI. K.M. ADUL BASHA AND IBRAHIM S/O MOHIDEEN SAAB AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT NO.1, BAITH UI NOOR KEMPAIAH BLOCK OPPOSITE MUBARAK MASJID J.C. NAGAR BANGLAORE - 560 006. …RESPONDENTS THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.10.2020 PASSED IN OS No.8241/2004 ON THE FILE OF THE XIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYOHALL UNIT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION. 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:37062-DB RFA No. 1405 of 2021 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant. 2. Till today, office objections are not complied with. Therefore, in view of the peremptory order dated 04.09.2024 passed by this Court, no further order is required. 3. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed for non-prosecution. SD/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE HKV List No.: 4 Sl No.: 1