IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR M.F.A. NO.10354 OF 2012 (CPC) C/W M.F.A.NO.10355 OF 2012 (CPC) IN M.F.A. NO.10354 OF 2012 BETWEEN:
1. SRI.S.NARENDRA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, S/O LATE.SHANTHILAL LALJI.
2. SMT.N.KALPANA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, W/O SRI.S.NARENDRAKUMAR.
BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF NO.155/9/2, 1ST FLOOR, 1ST STAGE, 5TH CROSS, OKALIPURAM, OPP: JAIN TEMPLE, BENGALURU – 560 021. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI.K.V.NARASHIMHAN, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI.DINESH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O M.C.MUDDUKRISHNAIAH, NO.36/2, SRIRAMPURAM, KRANTHIKAVI SARVAGNA ROAD, CHELUVIAH COMPOUND, OKALIPURAM EXTENSION, BENGALURU – 560021.
2. SRI.KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, S/O M.C.MUDDUKRISHNAIAH, NO.36/2, SRIRAMPURAM, KRANTHIKAVI SARVAGNA ROAD, CHELUVIAH COMPOUND, OKALIPURAM EXTENSION, BENGALURU – 560021. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.C.PARAMESHWARAPPA, ADV. FOR R1 & R2) **** THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43, RULE 1 (R) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.10.2012 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 IN O.S.NO.6234/2012 ON THE FILE OF XXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE, REJECTING THE I.A.NO.1 UNDER ORDER 39 RULES 1 AND 2.
IN M.F.A.NO.10355 OF 2012 BETWEEN:
1. SRI.S.NARENDRA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, S/O LATE.SHANTHILAL LALJI.
2. SMT.N.KALPANA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, W/O SRI.S.NARENDRAKUMAR.
BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF NO.155/9/2, 1ST FLOOR, 1ST STAGE, 5TH CROSS, OKALIPURAM, OPP: JAIN TEMPLE, BENGALURU – 560 021. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI.K.V.NARASHIMHAN, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI.DINESH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O M.C.MUDDUKRISHNAIAH, NO.36/2, SRIRAMPURAM, KRANTHIKAVI SARVAGNA ROAD, CHELUVIAH COMPOUND, OKALIPURAM EXTENSION, BENGALURU – 560021.
2. SRI.KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, S/O M.C.MUDDUKRISHNAIAH, NO.36/2, SRIRAMPURAM, KRANTHIKAVI SARVAGNA ROAD, CHELUVIAH COMPOUND, OKALIPURAM EXTENSION, BENGALURU – 560021. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.C.PARAMESHWARAPPA, ADV.FOR R1 & R2) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43, RULE 1 (r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.10.2012 PASSED ON I.A.NO.3 IN O.S.NO.6234/2012 ON THE FILE OF XXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE, REJECTING THE I.A.NO.3 UNDER ORDER 39 RULES 1 AND 2 OF CPC, FOR T.I.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT A Memo is filed by the learned counsel for the respondents, wherein, it is stated that they have never made any attempts of littering, parking any kind of vehicles and dumping waste/garbage in the suit schedule – A and B properties and they have not encroached the suit schedule – B property and never obstructed or interfered with the appellant’s use and enjoyment of the suit schedule – B property. The respondents undertake that they will not do any act as alleged by the appellants till the disposal of O.S. No.6234/2012.
2. In view of the submission of the counsel the memo is placed on record.
3. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the Memo of Undertaking.
Sd/- JUDGE SJ