Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 81816 (KAR)

SMT VENKATAMMA v. SRI RAMADAS

WP/50698/2018 · 2025-10-23

S Vishwajith Shetty

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41901 WP No. 50698 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 50698 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. VENKATAMMA W/O LATE MUNISWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS. 2. SRI KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE MUNISWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. 3. SMT. JAYAMMA D/O LATE MUNISWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS. ALL ARE RESIDING AT TELCHENAHALLI VILLAGE ANNAIAH ROAD J P NAGAR POST BENGALURU - 560 078. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI KUMAR J.C, ADV.) AND: 1. SRI RAMADAS S/O LATE MUNISWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT RAJAMMA GARDEN JARAGANAHALLI, J.P.NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 078. 2. SRI GOPALA S/O LATE MUNISWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS R/AT TELCHENAHALLI Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41901 WP No. 50698 of 2018 J.P. NAGAR POST BENGALURU - 560 078. 3. SMT. MUNIYAMMA D/O LATE MUNISWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT CHIKKAHULURU VILLAGE HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. 4. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA D/O LATE MUNISWAAPPA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/AT MADIGARAHALLI SHIVAKOTE POST HESARAGHATTA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M. VENKATAPPA, ADV., FOR R-1; R-2, R-4 - SERVED; V/O DTD 04.08.2025, NOTICE TO R-3 IS H/S) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 11.09.2017 PASSED BY THE II ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, IN FDP NO.30/2013 VIDE ANNX-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. Learned Counsel for the petitioners fairly submits that a final decree has been already drawn in FDP.No.30/2013, and therefore, this writ petition cannot be entertained. He submits that this writ petition may be dismissed as not pressed with - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41901 WP No. 50698 of 2018 liberty to the petitioners to prefer a regular appeal before the jurisdictional court within two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, and till then, the interim order granted in this petition may be continued. 2. Learned Counsel for the contesting respondent no.1 submits that after final decree was drawn in FDP.No.30/2013, respondent no.1 has already sold the property by executing a registered sale deed. 3. The aforesaid submissions are placed on record. Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to prefer a regular appeal as against the final orders passed in FDP.No.30/2013. 4. Interim order granter earlier in this writ petition shall continue for a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KK