IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M. SHYAM PRASAD BETWEEN:
REVIEW PETITION NO.114 OF 2019 IN CCC NO.2005 OF 2017 SMT. PAVITHRA PRAKASH WIFE OF SHIVA PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.174/3, 1ST MAIN ROAD, SHESHADRIPURAM, BENGALURU-560 020.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI M. NAGAPRASANNA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI UDAYA PRAKASH MULIYA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI Y.M. RAJU ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, GANDHINAGARA SUB-DIVISION, DR. T.M.C. RAMAN ROAD, BENGALURU-560 053.
2. SRI NARASIMHA SON OF CHIKKANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.174/2, J. LINGAYYA ROAD, SESHADRIPURAM, BENGALURU-560 020.
3. SRI MANJUNATH PRASAD COMMISSIONER, BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, BENGALURU-560 001.
... RESPONDENTS THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF THE CPC, 1908 PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 18.02.2019 PASSED BY THIS COURT IN CCC NO.2005 OF 2017.
***** THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This Review Petition is filed praying to review the order dated 18-2-2019 passed in CCC No.2005 of 2017.
2. On hearing learned counsels, we do not find any error apparent on the face of the record that calls for interference. The primary plea of the petitioner is that inspite of settlement arrived at, the same is not being enforced. However, it is needless to state that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the said order, he is always at liberty to initiate fresh contempt proceedings in accordance with law. The petition being devoid of merit, is dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE rsk/-