Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
V SRISHANANDA
Priya Khanna, D/o Romesh C. Khanna – Appellant
Versus
Tree House Apartment Owners Association – Respondent
ORDER :
V. SRISHANANDA, J.
Heard Sri.Skanda Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.M.D.Raghunath, learned counsel for the revision petitioner. This Court did not deem it fit to issue notice to the respondent.
2. Defendant is the revision petitioner challenging the dismissal of the application vide I.A.No.3 in O.S.No.8355/2023 dated 06.11.2025 filed under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) of Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter ‘CPC’ for short).
3. Facts of the case which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present revision petition are as under:
3.1. Respondent/plaintiff being the association filed a suit against the defendant with the following prayer:
“Wherefore, the plaintiff most respectfully prays before this Hon’ble Court that it may be pleased to pass a judgment and decree thereby directing the defendant to:
a. To pay a sum of Rs.37,58,233 (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakh Fifty Eight Thousand Two Hundred and Thirty Three Rupees Only) along with interest at 24% p.a. up to the date of the suit together with future interest at 24% p.a. from the date of the suit till realization in full,
b. Direct the defendant to pay the cost of the suit; and
c. Pass such other orders as this Hon’bl
An apartment owners association can claim arrears of maintenance despite one owner not executing the Deed of Declaration, as the claim constitutes a continuing cause of action. Limitations are applic....
The suit regarding alienation of ancestral property is governed by Article 109 of the Limitation Act, allowing for a 12-year period, which was not adhered to, leading to its dismissal.
A plaintiff's failure to seek explicit title declaration does not render the suit unmaintainable if sufficient evidence of ownership exists, especially when the trial is ongoing.
A plaint can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC if it is manifestly vexatious, does not disclose a clear right to sue, and is barred by limitation, particularly when the plaintiff does no....
A suit seeking declaration of tenancy rights without a claim for possession is barred under Section 144(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, as it indirectly seeks restitution already denied.
The court affirmed that a suit regarding title to property is barred by limitation under Article 58 of the Limitation Act, if not filed within three years of the cause of action arising.
The main legal point established is that disputes involving third party rights and allegations of fraud may be deemed non-arbitrable, requiring adjudication in a properly instituted proceeding with t....
Proceedings initiated under Section 114-A of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act by a party without locus standi and beyond three years are not maintainable and can be quashed, preserving the au....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
