Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6851 RSA No. 511 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 511 OF 2023 (RES) BETWEEN:
M/S. GENERAL INVESTMENTS AND COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LTD.
A PUBLIC LTD COMPANY HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT SYNDICATE HOUSE MANIPAL, REPRESENTED BY ITS GPA HOLDER, SRI JAGADEESKUDVA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, S/O LATE ANNAPPAKUDVA, OPP. BELMAN CHURCH, BELMAN POST, UDUPI DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. SRUTI C CHAGANTI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SUDHA S. NAYAK AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
2.
SNEHA S. NAYAK AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
3.
VINAYAK S. NAYAK AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
RESPONDENTS NO.1 IS THE WIDOW AND NO.2 AND 3 ARE THE CHILDREN OF LATE H. SADANANDA NAYAK, RESIDING AT LAXMIKRIPA DOOR NO.12-3-60, CONVENT ROAD, KADBETTU, UDUPI-576 101. …RESPONDENTS
Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6851 RSA No. 511 of 2023
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC., PRAYING TO: (I) CALL FOR RECORDS IN R.A.NO.25/2020, R.A.NO.29/2020 AND R.A.NO.30/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ACJM, UDUPI AND IN O.S.NO.223/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT UDUPI; (II) SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN R.A.NO.29/2020 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ACJM, UDUPI ON 25.11.2022 AND REJECT THE COUNTER-CLAIM FILED BY THE DEFENDANTS IN O.S.NO.223/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT UDUPI AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.03.2020 O.S.NO.223/2008 AND HOLD THE ADDITIONAL ISSUES NO.2, 3, 4 AND 5 FRAMED ON 14.01.2011 IN THE NEGATIVE; AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
ORAL ORDER
Counsel for appellant submits that she had received instructions that appellant and respondents have settled dispute and do not wish to pursue appeal.
2. Noting submission, appeal is dismissed as 'not pressed.'
Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE
PSG List No.: 2 Sl No.: 25