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.

Gopal vs N Bharathi

GOPAL vs N Bharathi

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Decided Feb 22, 2024
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1883800

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/8931/2017

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

GOPAL

Respondent

N Bharathi

Excerpt

-1-in the high court of karnataka at bengalurudated this the 22nd day of february, 2024 before the hon'ble mr justice h.p.sandesh miscellaneous first appeal no. 8931 of 2017 (cpc) between:1. gopal son of n. nagarajappa aged about 44 years resident of "shiva krupa" n:847/7a, beereshwara badavane, saraswathi nagara, davanagere-577 003. …appellant (by sri m. krishne gowda, advocate) and:1. n. bharathi w/o. n. prabhakar aged about 39 yearsdigitally signed house wife by sharanya t no:62, "revanasiddeshwara nilaya" location: high kengeri-upanagaracourt of karnataka (near apex nagara) bangalore-560 060.2. n. geetha w/o. d.s. sathyanaarayana aged about 43 years c/o. nagarajachar, ranganatha complex, gowri koplu road, hassan-573 201.3. pradeep kumar s/o. n. nagarajappa -2- aged about 34 years working in factory resident of no: 27 "anugraha building" 4th cross, kalidas layout, bangalore 50. …respondents (by sri shams ahmed pathan, advocate for r1 & r2) this mfa is filed under order 43 rule 1(d) of cpc,1908 against the order dated 31.08.2017 passed in misc.no. 26/2011 on the file of the principal senior civil judge and additional m.a.c.t.vi, shivamogga, dismissing the petition filed under order ix rule 13 of cpc. this appeal, coming on for orders, this day, the court delivered the following:judgmentlearned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo seeking permission of this court to withdraw the appeal, since the appellant and the respondents have settled the matter out of court. in terms of the memo, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. sd/- judge st list no.: 1 sl no.: 3

Full Judgment

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8931 OF 2017 (CPC) BETWEEN:

1. GOPAL SON OF N. NAGARAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESIDENT OF "SHIVA KRUPA" N:847/7A, BEERESHWARA BADAVANE, SARASWATHI NAGARA, DAVANAGERE-577 003. …APPELLANT (BY SRI M. KRISHNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND:

1. N. BHARATHI W/O. N. PRABHAKAR AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

Digitally signed         HOUSE WIFE
by SHARANYA T            NO:62, "REVANASIDDESHWARA NILAYA"
Location: HIGH           KENGERI-UPANAGARA

COURT OF KARNATAKA (NEAR APEX NAGARA) BANGALORE-560 060.

2. N. GEETHA W/O. D.S. SATHYANAARAYANA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS C/O. NAGARAJACHAR, RANGANATHA COMPLEX, GOWRI KOPLU ROAD, HASSAN-573 201.

3. PRADEEP KUMAR S/O. N. NAGARAJAPPA -2- AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS WORKING IN FACTORY RESIDENT OF NO: 27 "ANUGRAHA BUILDING" 4TH CROSS, KALIDAS LAYOUT, BANGALORE 50. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SHAMS AHMED PATHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(d) OF CPC,

1908 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31.08.2017 PASSED IN MISC.NO. 26/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL M.A.C.T.VI, SHIVAMOGGA, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER IX RULE 13 OF CPC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo seeking permission of this Court to withdraw the appeal, since the appellant and the respondents have settled the matter out of Court. In terms of the memo, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- JUDGE ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial