- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53694 CRP No. 22 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 22 OF 2016 (SC) BETWEEN: SRI C MOHAN RAM SINCE DEAD BY LR'S 1(A). SMT. RAJAMMA, W/O LATE C. MOHAN RAM, AGED ABOUT 52 EYARS, 1(B). SRI. M. SRI MURTHY, S/O LATE C. MOHAN RAM, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 1(C). SRI. M. CHANDRASHEKHAR, S/O LATE C. MOHAN RAM, AGED ABOUT 35 EYARS, 1(D). SRI. SURESH KUMAR .M, S/O LATE C. MOHAN RAM, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.1/3, 2ND MAIN ROAD, RAMACHANDRAPURAM, SRIRAMPURA, BENGALURU-560 021. AMENDED AS PER ORDER DTD:31.08.2023. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. T SHESHAGIRI RAO., ADVOCATE FOR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES’S OF DECEASED PETITIONER) Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53694 CRP No. 22 of 2016 AND: SRI C CHANDRA RAJ @ CHANDRAJ S/O LATE A. CHENNAIAH, SINCE DEAD BY LR'S 1(A). SMT. RADHA, W/O LATE CHANDRARAJ @ CHANDRAJ AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 1(B). SRI. PUNEETH, S/O LATE CHANDRARAJ @ CHANDRAJ AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 1(C). SRI. GAUTHAM, S/O LATE CHANDRARAJ @ CHANDRAJ AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, 1(D). SRI. RAVI, S/O LATE CHANDRARAJ @ CHANDRAJ AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, RESPODENT NO.1(A) TO 1(D) ARE RESIDING AT NO.E-2, 13/1, 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS, BRAMHAPURAM, RAMACHANDRAPURAM, BENGALURU-560 021. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B A RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R1(A TO D)) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SEC.18 OF SMALL CAUSES COURTS ACT., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.12.2015 PASSED IN SC NO.1143/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDL. SCJ AND XXXIII ACMM., MEMBER-MACT., BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR EVICTION. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53694 CRP No. 22 of 2016 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER The application is filed by the petitioner seeking special leave. Matter was adjourned from previous day to today to find out whether any objection is there from the respondent. Since there is no representation on behalf of the respondent, this Court perused the application and affidavit. The application needs to be allowed as there is discrepancy with regard to the service of notice. Accordingly, the following order is passed: ORDER (i) IA No.2/2025 is allowed. (ii) Consequently, the present civil revision petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE MR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14