IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.6 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
Sri.Ramappa, S/o Late Yallappa @ Yallabhovi, Aged about 34 years, R/at Hegganahalli Village, 2nd Bhovi Palya, Kundana Hobli, Hegganahalli Post, Devanahalli Taluk-562 110.
…Petitioner (By Smt.Susheela, Senior Advocate and Sri.Chandraiah H.S, Advocate) AND:
1. M/s R.Arunachalam Property Consultants And Promoters Pvt Ltd., Represented by its Chairman Dr.R.Arunachalam, Aged about 67 years, 2. Sri.Ramesh Arun, Managing Director, Major M/s R.Arunachalam Property Consultants And Promoters Pvt. Ltd., Both are having its office At Sy.No.183, (Between Shakthi Hill Resorts & Shanmuka Temple), 5th Stage, Rajarajeshwarinagar, Bengaluru-560 098.
3. Smt.Muniyamma W/o Late Yallappa @ Yallabovi Aged about 74 years, 4. Smt.Yallamma D/o late Yallappa @ Yallabovi Aged about 75 years, 5. Smt.Muniyakka W/o late Venkataswamy Aged about 32 years, 6. Sri.Kumar S/o late Venkataswamy Aged about 32 years, 7. Smt.Radha D/o late Venkataswamy Aged about 29 years, 8. Sri.Shivaraj S/o late Venkataswamy Aged about 27 years, 9. Sri.Kariyappa S/o late Yallappa @ Yallabovi Aged about 51 years, 10. Smt.Narayanamma D/o late Yallappa @ Yallabovi Aged about 46 years, 11. Smt.Venkatamma D/o late Yallappa @ Yallabovi Aged about 54 years, 12. Smt.Sakamma D/o late Yallappa @ Yallabovi Aged about 45 years, 13. Sri.Muniyappa S/o late Yallappa @ Yallabovi Aged about 42 years, 14. Smt.Muniyamma D/o late Muniyappa Aged about 70 years, 15. Smt.Jayalakshmamma W/o late Narayana, Aged about 52 years, 16. Sri.Peddanna S/o late Muniyappa, Aged about 50 years, 17. Sri.Nagaraj S/o Late Muniyappa, Aged about 47 years, 18. Sri.Shankar S/o late Muniyappa, Aged about 43 years, 19. Smt.Peddakka D/o late Venkataswamy @ Chikkavenkataswamy Aged about 52 years, 20. Smt.Sallapuri D/o late Venkataswamy @ Chikkavenkataswamy Aged about 49 years, 21. Smt.Muniyamma W/o late Ananthabhovi @ Anantha Aged about 67 years, 22. Smt.Chandramma D/o late Ananthabhovi @ Anantha Aged about 42 years, Respondents No.3 to 22 are R/at Hegganahalli Village, 2nd Bhovi Palya, Kundana Hobli, Hegganahalli Post, Devanahalli Taluk-562 110.
23. Sri.Narendra Babu, S/o Srinivasa Murthy, Aged about 38 years, R/at Huttanahalli Village, Jala Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk-560 043.
24. Sri.S.N.Vijayakumar, S/o Narayanappa B, Aged about, Major R/at Sonnappanahalli Village, Jala Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk-560 043.
… Respondents This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, against the judgment and decree dated 13.12.2018 passed in O.S.No.487/2017 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli, allowing the memo for dismissal of suit as not pressed.
This Petition coming on for Admission this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Heard Smt. Susheela, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner.
2. Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondents.
3. Heard on the question of admission.
4. In this petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 13.12.2018 passed by the trial Court by which the civil suit filed by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 has been dismissed as not pressed.
5. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the trial Court ought to have appreciated that the petitioner had filed the counter claim which was required to be tried notwithstanding the dismissal of the suit.
6. I have considered the submission made by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner. It is well settled in law that notwithstanding the dismissal of the suit, the counter claim has to be tried independently. However, while passing the impugned order, the aforesaid aspect of the matter has not been appreciated by the trial Court. Therefore, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to decide the counter claim filed by the petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously.
7. Needless to state that ad-interim order granted by the trial Court dated 17.07.2018 shall continue to remain in force, till the proceedings are taken up by the trial Court.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
In view of the disposal of the main petition, I.A.No.1/2019, does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, it is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-