IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.16 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
1. Shaik Mukthiar S/o late Mahaboob Sab Aged about 40 years R/at 14/1, Alahalli Village Uttarahalli Hobli Bangalore South Taluk Bangalore – 62.
2. Syed Ziya S/o late Syed Azeez Aged about 30 years R/at No.467 (Sy.No.14/1) Alahalli Village Uttarahalli Hobli Bangalore South Taluk Bangalore – 62.
3. Khadar Basha S/o Khasim Sab Aged about 45 years R/at No.867 (Sy.No.14/1) Alahalli Village Uttarahalli Hobli Bangalore South Taluk Bangalore – 62.
4. Suman D/o Ameer Khan Aged about 30 years R/at No.293 (Sy.No.14/1) Alahalli Village Uttarahalli Hobli Bangalore South Taluk Bangalore – 62.
5. Ruksar Taj W/o Syed Imran Aged about 25 years R/at No.20 (Sy.No.14/1) Alahalli Village Uttarahalli Hobli Bangalore South Taluk Bangalore – 62.
6. Taj Unnisa W/o Shaik Shabeer Aged about 40 years R/at No.294 (Sy.No.14/1) Alahalli Village Uttarahalli Hobli Bangalore South Taluk Bangalore – 62.
7. Neham Mum Taz W/o Shabeer Ahamad Aged about 35 years R/at No.42 (Sy.No.14/1) Alahalli Village Uttarahalli Hobli Bangalore South Taluk Bangalore – 62.
8. Mammooty S/o N.P.Kunhi Ahamad Aged about 40 years R/at No.758 (Sy.No.14/1) Alahalli Village Uttarahalli Hobli Bangalore South Taluk Bangalore – 62.
9. Shebeera, W/o Syed Nazeer, Aged about 55 years, R/at No.758 (Sy.No.14/1), Alahalli Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, Bangalore – 62. …Petitioners (By Sri.M.Thimmarayaswamy, Advocate - Absent) AND:
1. Madar Sab S/o late Raja Sab Aged about 78 years R/at Halahalli Village Uttarahalli Hobli Bangalore South Taluk Bangalore – 62.
2. Alla Bakash S/o late Raja Sab Aged about 65 years R/at Thilak Nagar Bangalore – 50.
3. M.Majith S/o Nisar Ahmed Aged about 35 years R/at No.396 (Sy.No.14/1) Alahalli Village Uttarahalli Hobli Bangalore South Taluk Bangalore – 62. …Respondents (By Sri. V. Vijayashekaregowda, Advocate for R1; (Petition stands abated against R1 vide order Dated 19.03.2019)) **** This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of CPC., against the order dated 04.01.2016 passed on I.A.No.7 in Ex.No.120/1997 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru (R) District., Bengaluru, rejecting the IA filed under Section 151 of CPC to recall the delivery warrant to break open the lock.
This Civil Revision Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioners absent. No representation.
2. On the previous date of hearing, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the Revision Petition has become infructuous in view of the order dated 04.1.2016 passed by the Executing Court for delivery of possession of the premises to the respondents-decree holders.
3. In pursuance to the said order, respondents- decree holders have taken possession of the suit schedule property.
4. Considering the submission of the counsel for the respondents-decree holders, last chance was given to hear the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners. But there is no representation.
Hence, the petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE SSD