SRI MUNISWAMAIAH @ MUNISWAMAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LRS SMT.JAYAMMA, 1A. W/O LATE MUNISWAMAIAH @ MUNISWAMAPPA AGED 66 YEARS, 1B. SRI.CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LATE MUNISWAMAIAH @ MUNISWAMAPPA AGED 34 YEARS vs SRI HANUMANARASAIAH SINCE DEAD BY LRS 1A. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE HANUMANARASAIAH AGED 65 YEARS, 2. SRI.H.KAGGALAIAH @ KAGGALAHANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE HANUMANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 3. SRI.H.ASWATHNARAYANA S/O LATE HANUMANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, 4. H.NARASIMHA MURTHY S/O LATE HANUMANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 5. H.NAGARAJU S/O LATE HANUMANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 5795

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J
SRI MUNISWAMAIAH @ MUNISWAMAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LRS SMT.JAYAMMA, 1A. W/O LATE MUNISWAMAIAH @ MUNISWAMAPPA AGED 66 YEARS, 1B. SRI.CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LATE MUNISWAMAIAH @ MUNISWAMAPPA AGED 34 YEARS – Appellant
Versus
SRI HANUMANARASAIAH SINCE DEAD BY LRS 1A. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE HANUMANARASAIAH AGED 65 YEARS, 2. SRI.H.KAGGALAIAH @ KAGGALAHANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE HANUMANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 3. SRI.H.ASWATHNARAYANA S/O LATE HANUMANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, 4. H.NARASIMHA MURTHY S/O LATE HANUMANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 5. H.NAGARAJU S/O LATE HANUMANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:MAHESH R UPPIN ,Respondent Advocate:

Table of Content
1. the significance of service of summons in ensuring fair trial. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments presented regarding procedural adherence. (Para 4)
3. court's assessment of the trial court's oversight. (Para 5)

ORAL ORDER

2. The respondent herein had originally filed O.S.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/

4. Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff/respondent submits that it is only delaying tactics. In fact, the summons were served on the defendants and they were waiting till the matter is posted for judgment and at that point of time, they have come up and filed this application. It is submitted that the Trial Court had rightly considered all these aspects and rightly dismissed the application as the said application cannot be maintained after the suit is reserved for judgment. It is submitted that no grounds are made out seeking interference with the well considered order passed by the Trial Court.

ORDER

ii. The matter is remanded back to the Trial Court for fresh consideration.

iv. The parties shall appear before the Trial Court on 10.02.2025 without further notice.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

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 :