SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 35596

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ, J
SRI.BASVAPRABHU PATIL – Appellant
Versus
SMT.PUSHPAVATHI – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:BHAVANA NAGANAGOUDA PATIL ,Respondent Advocate:

Table of Content
1. suit filed by the plaintiff (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
2. trial court's rejection (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. petition lacks merit (Para 10)

ORAL ORDER

2. The parties shall henceforth be referred to as they were arrayed before the Trial Court. The petitioner herein was the applicant in I.A.No.1/2024 filed before the Trial Court. The respondent No.1 was the plaintiff, while the respondent Nos.2 to 5 were the defendants before the Trial Court.

i) Pass a judgment and decree against the defendants 1, 2 and 4 restraining them permanently from releasing the death benefits of late Manjesh Yadav, who was working as Senior H.R. in Defendant No.1 & 2 Company from 2015 till his death in favor of Defendant No.3.

4. When the suit was set down for the evidence of the plaintiff, an application (I.A.No.1/2024) was filed by the applicant/petitioner herein to come on record. In the affidavit accompanying the application, it was stated that the plaintiff, her husband and their son/Sri. Manjesh Yadav had availed hand loan of Rs.5,00,000/- for the purposes of marriage of Sri. Manjesh Yadav. The plaintiff, her husband and their son executed a promissory note on 09.09.2020 and agreed to repay the amount w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top