Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 30621 (KAR)

MOHAMMAD U H v. GOKULAM CHITS AND FINANCE CO PVT LTD

CRL.RP/332/2020 · 2026-07-11

Lok Adalath

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, BENGALURU BEFORE THE NATIONAL LOK ADALAT IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 CONCILIATORS PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA & SMT. SOHANI HOLLA, MEMBER CRL.RP No.332/2020 (Lok Adalat No.1577/2026) BETWEEN MOHAMMAD U H S/O LATE MAMMI KUNHI AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT 2-45-C(10), FATHIMA MANZIL KUMPALA BYEPASS KOTEKAR POST MANGALURU TALUK D.K. - 575 009 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI MOHAMMAD.U.H, ADVOCATE) AND GOKULAM CHITS AND FINANCE CO PVT LTD GOKULAM TOWER NO.66, AREOT ROAD, CHENNAI - 24 BRANCH OFFICE AT 2ND FLOOR, KUNIL COMPLEX BENDOORWELL KANKANADY POST Digitally signed by SHASHIREKHA K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 2 MANGALURU - 575 001 REP. BY GPA HOLDER ITS LEGAL SUPERINTENDENT MR. JANARDHAN DEVADIGA S/O KITTANNA DEVADIGA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT MAROLI KANAPATHAGGU KULASHEKARA POST MANGALURU - 575 005 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI SURESH SUBBAIAH, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DISMISSAL DATED 22.01.2020 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K., MANGALURU IN CRL.A.NO.360/2013 AND ORDER OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED 17.10.2013 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., MANGALURU, D.K. IN C.C.NO.1636/2010 BY ALLOWING THIS CRL.RP AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONER. THIS CRL.RP COMING ON FOR CONCILIATION BEFORE NATIONAL LOK ADALAT, THE FOLLOWING CONCILIATION ORDER IS PASSED: CONCILIATION ORDER Parties are present along with their respective counsels. 2. Joint memo is filed signed by revision petitioner, respondent and their respective counsels. 3 3. Placing the joint memo on record, revision petition stands disposed of. 4. It is made clear that if the amount as agreed in the joint memo is not paid, accused/revision petitioner shall undergo imprisonment as ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate, confirmed by the First Appellate Court. 5. It is agreed that after payment of the amount as agreed in the joint memo, sentence of imprisonment stands set aside. 6. The amount in deposit, if any, is ordered to be withdrawn by the complainant/respondent under due identification. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER MR