- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28039-DB RFA No. 886 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 886 OF 2020 (SP) BETWEEN: K S SRIKANTAPPA S/O LATE SHIVANNA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/A KAMARAHALLI VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, GUNDLUPET TALUK CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT-571111. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ANIL KUMAR S., ADVOCATE) AND: NANJAMMA W/O LATE MADASHETTY @ MARISHETTY SINCE DECEASED BY HER LRS 1. MADU D/O LATE MADASHETTY @ MARISHETTY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 2. RAJU D/O LATE MADASHETTY @ MARISHETTY AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMI B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28039-DB RFA No. 886 of 2020 3. REVEELAMMA W/O LATE NANJASHETTY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS 4. RATHNAMMA D/O LATE NANJASHETTY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 5. BHAGYA D/O LATE NANJASHETTY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 6. RAMESHA S/O LATE NANJASHETTY AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 7. SIDDAMMA W/O LATE THIMMASHETTY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS 8. NANDINI W/O LATE VENKATARAJU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 9. RAJASHETTY S/O LATE THIMMASHETTY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 10. RATHNAMMA W/O LATE CHIKKAGANDASHETTY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 11. C MANJULA W/O LATE CHIKKAGANDASHETTY AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28039-DB RFA No. 886 of 2020 12. SUBRAMANYA S/O LATE CHIKKAGANDASHETTY AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS V/C/O Dt:18.07.2023, R12 DIED ON 01.11.2019 HIS LRS ARE ALREADY ON RECORD AS RESPONDENT Nos.10, 11 AND 13. 13. MADHU D/O LATE CHIKKAGANDASHETTY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT BEGURU VILLAGE AND HOBLI, GUNDLUPET TALUK-571111, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO R-1 TO R-9 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; AND R-10, R-11 AND R-13 IS HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DTD:01.09.2022) THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYINIG TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GUNDLUPET IN O.S.NO.41/2017 (122/2016) DATED 09.10.2019 PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR RETURN OF THE ADVANCE SALE CONSIDERATION PAID BY REJECTING THE RELIEF FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF AGREEMENT OF SALE, DECREE THE SUIT BY ALLONWING THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28039-DB RFA No. 886 of 2020 THROUGH-OUT WHICH IS NECESSARY IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has filed a memo dated 04.07.2025 for withdrawal of the appeal. 2. The memo is taken on record. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 3. The Court fee shall be refunded as applicable. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44