RAVIKUMAR .B v. SRI. BASAVARAJU
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KIADB, MARUTHI TOWERS 1ST FLOOR, NEAR SIT COLLEGE B.H.ROAD, TUMKUR-572138. …RESPONDENTS THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.01.2025 PASSED IN OS NO.65/2016 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE…
Judgment
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1257 OF 2025 (PAR) BETWEEN:
1. RAVIKUMAR .B S/O R.BASAVARAJU AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
2. RUDRESH .B S/O B.BASAVARAJU AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.17 KUMABRA BEEDI, K. NARAYANAPURA KOTHANUR POST, BENGALURU-560077. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. VINAYA KUMAR .N.D, ADVOCATE) Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND: SRI. BASAVARAJU DIED BY HIS LRs
SHIVAMMA W/O LATE BASAVARAJU AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/O. KANNUHALLI VILLAGE THYAMAGONDLU HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562132.
SMT. K.S. SACHIDANANDA MURTHY S/O K. SIDDARAMANNA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:19216 RFA No. 1257 of 2025 HC-KAR AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT KODIHALLI VILLAGE KESTUR POST, TUMKURU TALUK-572138.
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KIADB, MARUTHI TOWERS 1ST FLOOR, NEAR SIT COLLEGE B.H.ROAD, TUMKUR-572138. …RESPONDENTS THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.01.2025 PASSED IN OS NO.65/2016 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT TUMAKURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL JUDGMENT Office has raised objection that the appeal is not maintainable before this Court since the suit is valued at Rs.12,00,000/-. Appeal is dismissed reserving liberty appellants to file appeal before the appropriate Appellate Court. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:19216 RFA No. 1257 of 2025 HC-KAR It is made clear that the time spent before this Court shall be excluded by extending the benefit under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 69
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.