IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.431/2013(CPC) BETWEEN:
Sri M.B. Ramachandran S/o Late Byrappa Hindu, Aged 80 years R/at No.55 Nandidurga Main Road Bengaluru-560 046. .. APPELLANT (By Sri H.R. Ananthakrishnamurthy, Adv. for Sri H. Ramachandra, Adv.) AND:
1. Smt. Kousalya W/o T.K. Shankarappa Aged about 60 years R/at No.17, Central Street Cleveland Town Bengaluru-560 005.
2. The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike N.R. Square Bengaluru-560 001 Rep. by its Commissioner. ..RESPONDENTS (By Sri Sudarshan S, Adv. for R-1 Sri T Jayaprakash, Adv. for R-2) This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Order 43 Rule 1(r) read with Section 104 of CPC against the order dated: 12.10.2012 passed in O.S.No.26211/2011 on the file of the 28th Additional City Civil Judge, Mayo Hall, Bangalore, rejecting the application filed under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 of CPC.
This Miscellaneous First Appeal coming on for Admission this day, the Court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT This appeal is filed against the order dated 12.10.2012 passed in O.S.No.26211/2011 on the file of the 28th Addl. City Civil Judge, Mayo Hall, Bengaluru on the applications filed by the plaintiff and defendants, under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC and under Order 39 Rule 4 of CPC respectively, rejecting the application filed by the plaintiff and allowing the application filed by the defendants.
2. After arguing the matter for some time Sri.H.R.Ananthakrishnamurthy, learned counsel for the appellant fairly submits that in view of the earlier judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.8288/1992, he is not pressing the present appeal and requested the Court to direct the trial Court to expedite disposal of the suit and to pass orders without being influenced by any of the observations made in the impugned order by the trial Court.
3. The said submission is placed on record.
4. In view of the same, this appeal is disposed of as not pressed. The trial Court is directed to expedite disposal of the suit independently, based on the oral and documentary evidence to be produced by both the parties, without being influenced by any of the observations made by the trial Court in the impugned order.
In view of the disposal of the appeal, I.A.No.1/2017 does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, it is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE bkp