SRI CHIKKAHOMBAIAHIAH@ MANJUNATH v. SRI K KRISHNA REDDY
RFA/283/2026 · 2026-06-15
Anu Sivaraman, Venkatesh Naik T
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21949 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21949 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29173-DB RFA No. 283 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 283 OF 2026 (RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI CHIKKAHOMBAIAHIAH @ MANJUNATH S/O LATE SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT NO.169(8), 1ST E MAIN ROAD, J S NAGARA, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU 560 096.
…APPELLANT (BY SMT. SUDHA D., ADVOCATE) AND:
1.
SRI K KRISHNA REDDY S/O LATE SUBBA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS,
2.
SMT. K SARASWATHI REDDY @ K SARASWATHI @ VARADA REDDY SARASWATHI, W/O K KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
3.
SRI K MADAN MOHAN REDDY
Digitally signed by PAVITHRA N Location: High Court of Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29173-DB RFA No. 283 of 2026
@ KARETI MADAN MOHAN REDDY, S/O K KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY HIS SPA HOLDER, SMT. K SARASWATHI REDDY.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.149, CHANNAGIRI MANSION, FLAT NO.401, 4TH FLOOR, 11TH C CROSS, 1ST BLOCK, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU-560 086. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SREEDHAR M.C., ADV FOR R1 TO R3)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 08.01.2026 PASSED IN OS.NO.7460/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-36), DECREEING THE SUIT FOR ARREARS OF RENT AND DAMAGES EVICTION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29173-DB RFA No. 283 of 2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)
Learned counsel appearing for the appellant seeks leave of the Court to withdraw the appeal and seeks for refund of the Court fee.
2. The appeal is permitted to be withdrawn. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
3. However, the refund of Court fee will be considered by the Registry on production of proper identification with present address of the appellant before the Registry.
Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE
Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE
RAK,List No.: 3 Sl No.: 7