- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29684 RP No. 300 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA REVIEW PETITION NO. 300 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. M/S SRINIVASA TRUST, A TRUST REGISTERED UNDER THE INDIAN TRUST ACT, 1881, HAVING ITS PRINCIPAL OFFICE AT 7/21, 1ST CROSS, 9TH MAIN, RMV EXTENSION, BENGALURU – 560 080, REPRESENTED BY ITS TRUSTEE AND AUTHORISED SIGNATORY D.A. SRINIVAS. 2. KALPAJA DALAVOI, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, TRUSTEE OF M/S SRINIVASA TRUST, AT NO.87, SAI KESHAV, OPPOSITE SAI GRADENS SEEGAHALLI, BENGALURU – 560 067. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. DHYAN CHINAPPA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. ROHAN HOSMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. D.A. THEJESHWARI, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, WIFE OF K.M. SRINIVASA MURTHY, Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29684 RP No. 300 of 2025 RESIDING AT NO.5/25, 10TH MAIN, 13TH CROSS, JAYANAGARA 1ST BLOCK, BENGALURU – 560 066. 2. EKTA KUKREJA, DIRECTOR OF ANUSHKA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT., LTD., D/O OF LATE NANDA KUMAR BASHOMAL MENDA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO.21B, KINGFISHER TOWERS, KASTURBA ROAD CROSS, BENGALURU – 560 001. 3. ANUSHKA CONSTRUCTIONS PVT., LTD., COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.100/1, CITY CENTRE, OPP. TO TOWN HALL, JC ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 002, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, AVNASH AMARALAL. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. DHRITI VISHWANATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 READ WITH ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, PRAYING TO 1) REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 08.07.2025 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP NO.11450/2025 (GM-CPC) PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE A TO THE PETITION AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29684 RP No. 300 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court seeking review of the order dated 08.07.2025 passed in Writ Petition No.11450/2025, inasmuch as a novation of contract that was urged and which is though not explicitly accepted, is adverted to in paragraph 13 of the order that an issue of that kind should also be permitted to be framed as was sought for. 2. Heard Sri.Dhyan Chinnappa, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, Smt.Dhriti Vishwanath, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and have perused the material on record. 3. In paragraph 13, the indication is that there is novation by the sale deed. The novation as a matter of fact is by the Supplementary Agreement. Therefore, the sentence would read as novation by the Supplementary Agreement in place of novation by the sale deed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29684 RP No. 300 of 2025 4. This Court has allowed the petition in part and directed framing of two issues i.e., issue Nos.1 and 3, as was sought and not the issue No.2. As the issue No.2 could be urged in the issue No.5 that was already framed before the concerned Court, the learned counsel for the respondents though objects to the considering of the issue of novation under the head of issue No.5, the Court is of the considered opinion that in the light of paragraph No.13 passed in the order, the issue of novation also can be considered under the issue No.5 that was already framed or under Additional issue No.3 that is now permitted to be framed. 5. In that light, except the aforesaid clarification, there is no other ground to review the order as is sought for. Ordered accordingly and Review Petition is disposed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE CBC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5