IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.391/2017 (IO) BETWEEN:
SRI. MUNI NAGA REDDY @ M.N. REDDY S/O LATE A.MUNISWAMY REDDY AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS NO.3, 3RD “B” MAIN ROAD 4TH CROSS, 3RD BLOCK CMR ROAD, KALYAN NAGAR BANGALORE – 560 084 (BY SRI. T. SESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SMT. NAGAVENI D/O LATE MUNIRAJ REDDY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS RESIDING AT NEAR JUNIOR COLLEGE, SCHOOL KACARAKANAHALLI ST.THOMAS TOWN POST BANGALORE – 560 084 2. SMT. LAKSHMIDEVI D/O LATE MUNIRAJ REDDY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.131 NALAGADARANAHALLI BANGALORE – 560 073 3. SMT. NAGAMMA D/O LATE MUNIRAJ REDDY ...PETITIONER AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.227 KACHARAKANAHALLI OPP. BTS BUS DEPOT HENNUR MAIN ROAD ST. THOMAS TOWN POST BANGALORE – 560 084 4. SMT. JYOTHI D/O LATE MUNIRAJ REDDY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.309 3RD MAIN, SHANTHINAGAR ROAD KALYANANAGAR BANGALORE – 560 043 5. SRI. V. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O VEMULA ANJANEYALU AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 6. SRI. K. SATHISH S/O MUNIRATHNA NAIDU AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 7. SRI. PRAKASH PALANI S/O S. PALANI AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESPONDENTS 5 TO 7 HAVING THEIR OFFICE AT NO.4 & 5, 100 FEET ROAD BANASWADI BANGALORE – 560 043 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ARAVIND V CHAVAN, ADVOCATE FOR C/R3;
VIDE ORDER DATED 06.12.2017, NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 HELD SUFFICIENT;
NOTICE TO R4 TO R7 DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 06.12.2017) THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11.09.2017 PASSED ON IA NO.4 IN OS.NO.6903/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE XXIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE IA NO.4 FILED UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11(d) OF CPC., FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT.
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER The present revision petition is filed by defendant No.3 against the order passed by the trial Court dated 11.09.2017 dismissing the application/I.A.4 filed under Order 7 Rule 11 (d) of Code of Civil Procedure with cost of `1,000/- and posted the matter for filing of additional written statement.
2. Sri. T.Sheshagiri Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner after arguing the matter for sometime submits that the suit was filed in the year 2012, if a direction is issued to decide the suit within a period of six months, he may not press the civil revision petition. Accordingly, a memo filed to withdraw the Civil Revision Petition.
3. The said Memo is placed on record.
4. Taking into consideration the suit is of the year 2012 and the suit is filed for partition and separate possession and the suit is posted for plaintiff’s evidence, the trial Court is directed to expedite the suit itself within an outer limit of one year from the date of receipt of a copy of this order subject to co-operation of both the parties to the lis.
Accordingly, civil revision petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE BS