Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 69072 (KAR)

C RAJALAKSHMI v. T K SREEDHAR

RSA/853/2018 · 2025-12-17

K Manmadha Rao

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54085 RSA No. 853 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 853 OF 2018 (INJ) BETWEEN: C. RAJALAKSHMI W/O P.S. JAYARAJ, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O 3 "A" CROSS, GANGOTHRI ROAD, GANGOTHRINAGAR, TUMAKURU - 572 101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE) AND: T.K. SREEDHAR S/O H. KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O 6TH CROSS, LING ROAD, VEERABHADRASWAMY NILAYA, S.I.T. EXTENSION, TUMAKURU - 572 101. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. KASHINATH J.D, ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DTD 08.02.2018 PASSED IN RA.NO.158/2013, ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM., TUMAKURU ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMI B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54085 RSA No. 853 of 2018 03.09.2013 PASSED IN OS.NO.607/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC.,-II, TUMKURU. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo dated 01.12.2025, which reads as under: "In the captioned appeal arises out of and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 08.02.2018 handed down by the court of learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tumakuru in R.A.No.158/2013 overturning the judgment and decree dated 03.09.2013 delivered by the court of learned I Additional Civil Judge, Tumakuru in O.S.No.607/2007. The lis brought before Court in O.S.No.607/2007 out of which above second appeal arises has been amicably settled between the parties and in the circumstances the appellant does not want to prosecute the above appeal. Therefore, the appeal may be dismissed as withdrawn by allowing this memo in the interest of justice and equity." 2. The memo is taken on record. 3. In view of the said memo, the regular second appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE HDK