SRI. P. VADIVELU v. SRI. P. KRISHNAMURTHY
Case at a glance
- Bench
- R NATARAJ
- Neutral citation
- 2025:KHC:6930
Outcome
Dismissed
petition is dismissed as having become infructuous
Provisions considered
Judgment
SRI. P. VADIVELU NOW AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O SRI C.PERUMAL R/A 7, GROUND FLOOR, T.M.COMPOUND, 1ST CROSS, VIJINAPURA, DOORAVANINAGARA POST, BENGALURU – 560 016. (BY SRI. SRINIVASA, ADVOCATE) AND:
SRI. P. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O LATE C.PERUMAL AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/A 7, GROUND FLOOR, T. M. COMPOUND, 1ST CROSS, VIJINAPURA, DOORAVANINAGARA POST, BENGALURU – 560 016.
SMT. P. SHANTHAKUMARI W/O SUNDER RAJ, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/AT NO.129/115, MANALI NEW TOW, CHENNAI – 103. Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6930 WP No. 17610 of 2024
SRI. P. CHANDRASHEKAR, S/O LATE C.PERUMAL, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
SMT. KUSHALA KUMARI W/O P.CHANDRA SHEKAR AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS RESPONDENT Nos.3 AND 4 ARE RESIDING AT GROUND FLOOR, T. M.COMPOUND, 1ST CROSS, VIJINAPURA, DOORAVANINAGARA POST, BENGALURU – 560 016. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR C/R4 IN C.P.NO.884/2024) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER FOUND AT ANNX-F TO THIS WRIT PETITION PASSED VIDE ORDER DTD. 15.04.2024 O.S.NO.25453/19 ON I.A.NO.7 FILED BY THIS PETITIONER HEREIN ON THE FILE OF THE LXXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE, MAYOHALL UNIT, BENGALURU BY SETTING ASIDE THE SAME BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION AND FURTHER PRAYS TO ALLOW THE I.A.NO.7 FILED BY PETITIONER HEREIN WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNX-D AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for caveator respondent No.4 submits that the suit from which the present writ petition arises was disposed of on 07.01.2025. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6930 WP No. 17610 of 2024
Operative part
2. In view of the aforesaid submission, writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. However, the contention urged in this writ petition is kept open to be urged in an appeal that may be filed against the judgment and decree passed in the aforesaid suit. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE PB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petition is dismissed as having become infructuous
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Constitution of India — art. 227.
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.