Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 87180 (KAR)

YATHISH v. SRI. KRISHNAPPA

CRP/98/2018 · 2025-11-27

V Srishananda

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49457 CRP No. 98 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.98 OF 2018 (RES) BETWEEN: 1. YATHISH S/O BHEEMAIAH AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 2. HEMANTH S/O BHEEMAIAH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDENT AT NONAVINAKERE, TIPTUR TALUK - 572201 TUMKUR DISTRICT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI M.D.KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. KRISHNAPPA SINCE DIED BY HIS LR DEEPU @ HEMANTHA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT NONAVINAKERE TIPTUR TALUK - 572201 TUMKUR DISTRICT 1(a) DEEPU @ HEMANTHA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS WORKING AS REVENUE SECRETARY R/AT NONAVINAKERE Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49457 CRP No. 98 of 2018 TIPTUR TALUK-572 201 TUMKUR DISTRICT. 2. SRI BHEEMAPPA S/O HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT NONAVINAKERE, SOPPINABEEDI TIPTUR TALUK - 572201 TUMKUR DISTRICT 3. SRI N H RAJA S/O HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT NONAVINAKERE, SOPPINABEEDI TIPTUR TALUK - 572201 TUMKUR DISTRICT 4. SRI SHETTALAIAH S/O HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT NONAVINAKERE, SOPPINABEEDI TIPTUR TALUK – 572 201 TUMKUR DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M V SRIDHAR CHAKRAVARTHI, ADVOCATE FOR R1(a); R2, R3, R4 - SERVED) THIS CRP FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.10.2017 PASSED IN FDP No.10/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., TIPTUR, DISMISSING THE PETITION TO DRAW THE FINAL DECREE IN TERMS OF IN PRELIMINARY DECREE PASSED IN O.S.No.196/94. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49457 CRP No. 98 of 2018 ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the revision petitioners has filed a memo which reads as under: “The above named petitioners in the above case prays that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to permit the petitioners to withdraw as not pressed in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Placing the memo on record, Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50