IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.2178 OF 2016 (DEC) BETWEEN:
1. KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT: AALAPPANAHALLI KASABA HOBLI HOSKOTE TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT PIN 562 114 2. RAJANNA S/O LATE ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT: KODIHALLI JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI HOSKOTE TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT PIN 562 114 …. APPELLANTS (BY SRI V.S.VENKATESHA GOWDA, ADV. FOR SRI G.BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADV.) AND:
1. MUNIYAPPA S/O LATE ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/AT: AALAPPANAHALLI KASABA HOBLI HOSKOTE TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT PIN 562 114 2. SMT.MANJULA W/O PAPANNA D/O LATE BYAMMA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT: CAR STREET HOSAKOTE TOWN PIN 562 114 SMT. NARAYANAMMA SINCE DEAD BY LR’S 3. SMT.NAGARATHNA W/O RAJANNA D/O LATE NARAYANAMMA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT: KODIHALLI JADIGENAHALLI HOBLI HOSKOTE TOWN PIN 562 114 4. SMT.MANJULA W/O PAPANNA D/O LATE NARAYANAMMA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT: BRAHMIN STREET HOSAKOTE TALUK PIN 562 114 5. SMT.SHAKUNTHALA @ SUDHA W/O BAJJENIRU ANJANAPPA D/O LATE NARAYANAMMA AGED ABOUT: 43 YEARS R/AT: HOUSE NO.2 APPACHIPURA NADAVATHY POST HOSKOTE TALUK PIN 562 114 6. SMT.INDRAMMA W/O RAMAKRISHNA D/O LATE NARAYANAMMA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT: BANGALORE ROAD ANEKAL – 562 106 7. SMT.SHANTHAMMA, MAJOR W/O LAKSHMANGOWDA. N R/AT: KUMBENA AGRAHARA KADUGODI POST BANGALORE-560 067 8. SMT.GOWRAMMA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS W/O CHIKKANANJAPPA D/O LATE ERAPPA R/AT: BELUMARANAHALLI VILLAGE VEMGAL HOBLI KOLAR TALUK & DISTRICT-563 101 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H.DEVENDRAPPA, ADV. FOR R2, R3, R6-R8) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:10.01.2011 PASSED IN R.A.NO.47/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER FAST TRACK COURT-II BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.01.2008 PASSED IN O.S.NO.107/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC., HOSKOTE.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T The appellants counsel has filed memo for withdrawal of the appeal under the signature of both the appellants.
2. When the appellants themselves intend to withdraw the appeal and there are no cross-objections in the appeal, there is no impediment to grant permission to withdraw. Therefore, office objection is over ruled. Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
Sd/- JUDGE KG