Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

M/S Shilapa Wines vs Smt M Shanthamma W/O Late And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|18 December, 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT C.R.P. NO.301/2019 BETWEEN:
M/S SHILAPA WINES NO.1 & 2, ASHOK COMPLEX GANGAMMA TEMPLE STREET JALAHALLI BENGALURU -560013 BY ITS PROPRIETOR SMT. MANJULA W/O NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS.
...PETITIONER (BY SRI.MOHAN BHAT, ADV.) AND:
1. SMT. M SHANTHAMMA W/O.LATE M.PANDURANGAM AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS 2. M PRABHURANGAM S/O.LATE M.PANDURANGAM AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS 3. M VIJAY KUMAR S/O.LATE M.PANDURANGAM AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS 4. M RAJU S/O LATE M.PANDURANGAM AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS 5. M ASHOK S/O LATE M.PANDURANGAM AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS 6. M SUBHASH S/O LATE M.PANDURANGAM AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 7. M SHIVAKUMAR S/O LATE M.PANDURANGAM AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 8. M RAVIKUMAR S/O LATE M.PANDURANGAM AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS 9. M BALAKRISHNA S/O LATE M.PANDURANGAM AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.905/2 6TH CROSS, K.N.EXTENSION YESHWANTHPURA BENGALURU-560022.
RESPONDENTS 1 TO 8 ARE ALL REP. BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER THE 9TH RESPONDENT HEREIN M.BALAKRISHNA S/O.LATE M.PANDURANGAM AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.905/2 6TH CROSS, K.N.EXTENSION YESHWANTHPURA BENGALURU 560022.
(BY SRI M V CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY, ADV.) …RESPONDENTS THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 18 OF SMALL CAUSES COURT ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.04.2019 PASSED IN SC.NO.1496/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE XVI ADDL.JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU DECREEING THE SUIT FOR EJECTMENT.
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R This revision petition is under Section 18 of the Small Causes Courts Act, 1964 challenging the judgment and decree dated 27.04.2019 in S.C.No.1496/2011 on the file of the XVI Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru.
2. Today, the parties have filed joint memo dated 18.12.2019 which reads as follows:
The Petitioner and Respondents humbly submits as follows:
(1) The Petitioner and the Respondents have settled all the disputes between them in respect of the Schedule Property and therefore they are filing this Joint Memo.
(i) The Petitioner shall handover the vacant possession of the Schedule Property to the Respondent on 18.12.2019 forthwith.
(ii) The Respondents having taken the possession of the Schedule Property, also withdraw all the allegations in the Petition filed before the trial Court. The Respondents also undertake that they shall not make any claims for arrears of rents in respect of the Schedule Property.
(iii) The Petitioner and Respondents jointly submit that they shall not have any claims or counter claims against each other in view of this Settlement.
(iv) The Respondent No.9 states that he is the power of attorney holder of all the Respondents and he is authorized to sign this Joint Memo.
Hence, this Joint Memo. Hence, dispose the petition accordingly.”
3. The joint memo is signed by the petitioner as well as the advocate for the petitioner. On behalf of the respondents, respondent No.9 has signed the joint memo and it is stated that he is the GPA holder for Respondents No.1 to 8. Counsel for respondents has also signed the joint memo. Counsel for respective parties have identified the petitioner and respondent No.9.
4. Counsel for respondents submits that today, the respondents have taken vacant possession of the suit schedule premises from the petitioner. Both parties submit that they have no further claim against each other.
5. Accordingly, the revision petition is disposed of in terms of the joint memo.
Sd/- JUDGE mpk/-* CT:bms
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Judges
  • S G Pandit C