- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5 WP No. 38398 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT PETITION NO. 38398 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. LALITHAMMA W/O CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 2. JAYANNA S/O LATE SIDDAHONNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, 3. JAYALAKSHMI W/O NAGARAJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, ALL THE ABOVE ARE RESIDENT OF ARJUNABETTAHALLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK-562 123. BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHAMS AHMED PATHAN., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. GANESH S/O KUMARSWAMY, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT MANJUNATHANAGAR, BATAWADI, TUMKUR TOWN AND DISTRICT-572 101. 2. G.KUMARSWAMY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, S/O LATE GANGAREVANNA, - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5 WP No. 38398 of 2018 KANNADA TEACHER, SIDDAGANGA HIGH SCHOOL, KYATHASANDRA, TUMKUR-572 101. 3. MOHAN KUMAR AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, S/O LATE SIDDAHONNAIAH, 4. MAHADEVAIAH AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, S/O LATE SIDDAHONNAIAH, 5. M.B.RAMACHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, S/O LATE BETTAPPA, RESIDENT OF MUNGANAHALLI, CHINTHAMANI TALUK-563 129, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. 6. K.G.SRINIVASMURTHY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, S/O LATE GOVINDAPPA, R/O DYAVASANDRA VILLAGE-561 204. ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT. 7. M.VENKATARAM AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, S/O MUNIYAPPA, 8. M.MYLARI AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, S/O MUNIYAPPA, 9. M.SATHATEJA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O MUNIYAPPA, 10. M.SOWBHAGYA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, D/O MUNIYAPPA, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5 WP No. 38398 of 2018 RESPONDENT NO.7 TO 10 ARE RESIDENT OF CHIKKABIDARAKAI VILLAGE-562 123, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE. 11. M/S. SHIRIYA RICE MILLS, PLOT NO.116 & 117, INDUSTRIAL GROWTH CENTER, HYDERABAD ROAD, RAICHUR-584 102. REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SRI.GAUTAM A.SREERAM. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. OMKAR MURTHY.G., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. VISHWANATH.G.N., ADVOCATE FOR R11; V/O DATED: 24.07.2025, WP IS AGAINST R2 TO R10 IS REJECTED) THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH / SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 31.05.2018, PASSED BY THE COURT OF SR. CIVIL JUDGE AT NELAMANGALA, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT IN O.S.NO. 149/2011, ANSWERING THE ISSUE NO.6 IN AFFIRMATIVE HOLDING THAT, THE PLAINTIFF HAS PROPERLY VALUED THE SUIT AND THE COURT FEE PAID IS SUFFICIENT (ISSUE NO.6 " WHETHER THE SUIT IS PROPERLY VALUED AND THE COURT FEE PAID IS SUFFICIENT?") VIDE ANNEX-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL ORDER 1. None appears for the petitioners. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the matter has become infructuous. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5 WP No. 38398 of 2018 2. Learned counsel for the respondent has filed a memo, the contents of which are extracted below: “MEMO The Respondent No.1 in the above case most respectfully submits that the present W.P No.38398/2018 becomes infructuous, inasmuch as the suit in O.S.No.149/2011 which is decreed in favour of respondent no.1 dated 02/12/2025 in view of the decree passed by the learned trail court, no surviving cause action remains for consideration in the present writ petition. Hence the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.” 3. In light of the above, the petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. All pending applications, if any, stand closed. (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE TIN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6 Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA