(BY SRI. GOPALA KRISHNA B.N., ADVOCATE) v. SRI. B.N. NAVEEN KUMAR
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
In light of the same, petition is dismissed as having
Provisions considered
Judgment
Operative part
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV CIVIL PETITION NO. 132 OF 2023 BETWEEN: …PETITIONER SMT. C. SHRUTHI, W/O B.N. NAVEEN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHOWDESHWARI TEMPLE STREET, TIRUMALE, MAGADI TOWN, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT. (BY SRI. GOPALA KRISHNA B.N., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. B.N. NAVEEN KUMAR, S/O SRI B.R. NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 12, 6TH CROSS, SUBBANNA GARDEN, MARANAHALLI EXTENSION, VIJAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 040. AND WORKING AS: TEST ENGINEER, AT COGNIZANT CO. MANYATHA TECH PARK, BANGALORE, EMPLOYEE NO. 347142. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. KIRAN KUMAR K., ADVOCATE) THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 24 OF CPC, PRAYING TO WITHDRAW THE PETITION MC.NO. 7004/2022, ON THE FILE OF VI ADDL. PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BANGALORE, AND TRANSFER THE SAME TO THE COURT, PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT Digitally signed by V KRISHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:11826 CP No. 132 of 2023 MAGADI, RAMANAGARA DIST. AND TO PASS ANY SUCH OTHER ORDER/S AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT, UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo which reads as hereunder: "The undersigned submit that the above case be dismissed as withdrawn since the matter has been settled out of the court between the parties. In view of the settlement in M.C., the above petition becomes infructuous, in the interest of justice.” In light of the same, petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- JUDGE MCR
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In light of the same, petition is dismissed as having
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 24.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.