IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.2669 OF 2016 (CPC) BETWEEN M/s. Nam Estates Pvt. Ltd., Having its office at 1st Floor, Embassy Point, No.150, Infantry Road, Bengaluru-560001.
Rep. by its authorized signatory Mr. B.S.Narayana.
(By Sri. V.Vighneshwara, Advocate) AND 1. Sri. Muniswamy, S/o. Late Munivenkatappa, Aged about 35 years, 2. Smt. Yellamma, W/o. Late Muniraju, Aged 38 years, 3. Sri. Lokesh, S/o. Late Muniraju, Aged about 18 years, 4. Smt. Manjula, D/o. Late Narayanamma, Aged about 26 years, …Appellant R1 to R4 are R/at No.140, B.Ramaiah Colony, Muthyalanagar, MSRIT Post, Bengaluru-54.
5. Sri. Motappa, S/o. Late Kolagarabovi Venkatabovi Aged about 72 years, 6. Smt. Venkatamma, W/o. Motappa, Aged about 55 years, 7. Sri. Jayaram, S/o. Motappa, Aged about 36 years, 8. Sri. Peddanna, S/o. Motappa, Aged about 34 years, 9. Sri. Chikkamuniyappa, S/o. Motappa, Aged about 30 years, 10. Smt. Yellamma, D/o. Motappa, Aged about 37 years, 11. Smt. Channamma, W/o. Late Ramappa, Aged about 72 years, 12. Smt. Sallapuri, D/o. Late Ramappa, Aged about 38 years, 13. Smt. Nagarathnamma, D/o. Late Ramappa, Aged about 36 years, 14. Smt. Shyamala, D/o. Late Ramappa, Aged about 34 years, R5 to R14 are R/at Bhovi Palya, Navarathna Agrahara Jala Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, Bengaluru-575632.
15. Sri. V.S.Aravindan, S/o. V.R.Singarachari, Aged about 47 years, R/at No.4911, 2nd Cross, Nanjappa, Garden Manjunath Nagar, R.T.Nagar, Bengaluru-560032.
(R1 to R4 – served, vide order dated 17.7.19 appeal against R5 to R15 has been dismissed) …Respondents This MFA is filed under Order 43 Rule 1 (r) of the CPC, against the order dated 8.7.2015 passed on I.A.No.3 in O.S.No.244/2015 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, JMFC, Devanahalli, Bengaluru Rural, allowing I.A.No.3 under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of CPC.
This MFA coming on for orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Appellant’s counsel is present. On perusal of the appeal memo it is found that appellant seeks to challenge the order dated 08.07.2015 passed on I.A.3 in O.S.No.244/2015. If the impugned order is perused, it is found that the trial court did not dispose of I.A.3 on 08.07.2015, rather it fixed the date 23.07.2015 for arguing on I.A.3. Therefore the appeal is prematurely filed. The learned counsel for the appellant now submits that I.A.3 was disposed of by the trial court very recently dismissing it. Therefore this appeal does not survive. It is dismissed.
SD/- JUDGE sd