SMT. SHARANAMMA v. SRI YAMANAPPA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn
Provisions considered
Judgment
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 100569 OF 2022 (PAR/POS) BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SHARANAMMA W/O SURESH DANDIN AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE HOLD WORK, R/O. S.T. HANAMANAL OF HUNGUND, TQ. HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT.
2. SRI. SHASHIKUMAR S/O. SURESH DANDIN AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. S.T HANAMANAL OF HUNGUND, TQ. HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT.
3. SRI. RAVIKUMAR S/O. SURESH DANDIN AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. HANAMANAL S. T. OF HUNGUND, TQ. HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT.
4. KUMARI. SHRIDEVI D/O. SURESH DANDIN AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. S.T. HANAMANAL OF HUNGUND, TQ. HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT. (BY SRI MALLIKARJUN C. HUKKERI, ADVOCATE) AND:
SRI YAMANAPPA S/O SANGAPPA HULAGERI AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. ALLAMAPURPET NOW ILKAL, TQ. HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT. BHARATHI H M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD …APPELLANTS - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13373 RSA No. 100569 of 2022
SRI BASAVANNEPPA S/O. YALLAPPA JUTTALAD AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. NAREGALL, TQ. RON, DIST. GADAG.
SMT. NINGAVVA W/O FAKIRAPPA DANDIN AGE: 85 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. S. T. HANAMANAL, TQ. HUNGAUNDI, DIST. BAGALKOT.
SRI. SANGAPPA S/O FAKIRAPPA DANDIN AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. S. T. HANAMANAL, TQ. HUNGAUNDI, DIST. BAGALKOT.
SRI. SHANKRAPPA S/O FAKIRAPPA DANDIN AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. S. T. HANAMANAL, TQ. HUNGAUNDI, DIST. BAGALKOT. …RESPONDENTS THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE DISMISSAL ORDER DATED 06.11.2021 PASSED IN R.A. NO.16/2019 BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS HUNGUND AT HUNGUND AND ALLOWED THE APPEAL IN ITS ORIGINAL FORM FOR FRESH DISPOSAL BY GIVING OPPORTUNITY BOTH PARTIES. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13373 RSA No. 100569 of 2022 ORAL ORDER
1. Learned counsel for the appellants files a memo for withdrawal of the appeal.
Operative part
3. Memo is placed on record. Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Liberty is reserved to the appellants to file comprehensive suit on the same cause of action. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE KGK, CT:GSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 100.
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.