Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

V Ranganathan vs B V Kiran Kumar

V Ranganathan vs B V Kiran Kumar

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Decided Aug 21, 2024
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1858205

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Karnataka High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
MFA/1313/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

V Ranganathan

Respondent

B V Kiran Kumar

Excerpt

-1-in the high court of karnataka at bengalurudated this the 21st day of august, 2024 before the hon'ble smt. justice lalitha kanneganti miscellaneous first appeal no. 1313 of 2020 (cpc) between:1. v ranganathan aged about 74 years rk township, yarandahalli, jigani road, bangalore 560 105.2. sri. r. sriram aged about 44 years s/o. sri. v ranganathan, digitallysigned by rk township, megha yarandahalli, mohan jigani road,location: high court bangalore 560 105. of …appellants karnataka (by sri. chandranath ariga k.,advocate) and:1. b v kiran kumar aged about 33 years -2-2. sri. b v aurn kumar aged about 32 years both are r/at no. 71, ganapathy temple building, begur road, bommanahalli, bangalore 560068. …respondents (by sri.s.g. lokesh., advocate for c/r1 and r2) this mfa is filed u/o.43 rule 1(d) of cpc, against the order dated 04.11.2019 passed in misc.petition no.915/2014 on the file of the xxxix additional citycivil and sessions judge, bengaluru (cch-40), dismissing ia no.1 filed u/s.5 of the limitation act, consequently dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner u/o.9 rule 13 r/w sec.151 of cpc as barred by limitation. this appeal, coming on for orders, this day,judgment was delivered therein as under:coram: hon'ble smt. justice lalitha kannegantioral judgmentlearned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo stating that the parties have settled the dispute out of the court. memo is taken on record. -3-2. accordingly, the appea is 'dismissed' as withdrawn.3. pending i.as, if any, shall stand disposed of. sd/- (lalitha kanneganti) judge sa

Full Judgment

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1313 OF 2020 (CPC) BETWEEN:

1. V RANGANATHAN AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS RK TOWNSHIP, YARANDAHALLI, JIGANI ROAD, BANGALORE 560 105.

2. SRI. R. SRIRAM AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O. SRI. V RANGANATHAN, Digitally

signed by          RK TOWNSHIP,
MEGHA              YARANDAHALLI,
MOHAN              JIGANI ROAD,

Location: HIGH COURT BANGALORE 560 105. OF …APPELLANTS KARNATAKA (BY SRI. CHANDRANATH ARIGA K.,ADVOCATE) AND:

1. B V KIRAN KUMAR AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS -2-

2. SRI. B V AURN KUMAR AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT NO. 71, GANAPATHY TEMPLE BUILDING, BEGUR ROAD, BOMMANAHALLI, BANGALORE 560068. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.S.G. LOKESH., ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 AND R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(d) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 04.11.2019 PASSED IN MISC.PETITION NO.915/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXIX ADDITIONAL CITY

CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-40), DISMISSING IA NO.1 FILED U/S.5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT, CONSEQUENTLY DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER U/O.9 RULE 13 R/W SEC.151 OF CPC AS BARRED BY LIMITATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

ORAL JUDGMENT

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo stating that the parties have settled the dispute out of the Court. Memo is taken on record. -3-

2. Accordingly, the appea is 'dismissed' as withdrawn.

3. Pending I.As, if any, shall stand disposed of. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE SA

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial