Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
H.P. SANDESH, J
SRI H.P. MANJUNATH – Appellant
Versus
SRI MOHAN – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the factual matrix of the case (Para 3) |
| 2. the main contention of the learned counsel (Para 4) |
| 3. the learned counsel would contend (Para 5 , 6 , 9) |
| 4. the learned counsel also relied upon (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. the learned counsel brought to the notice (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. having heard the learned counsel (Para 18) |
| 7. having heard the respective learned counsel (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 8. with these observations (Para 22) |
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the caveator/respondent No.1.
2. This miscellaneous first appeal is filed praying this Court to set aside the order dated 27.09.2024 passed by the XII Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-7) in dismissing I.A.No.1 filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC in O.S.No.4575/2024 filed by the appellants/plaintiffs and consequently to allow the said I.A. filed by the appellants.
3. The factual matrix of the case of the appellants in the plaint while seeking the relief of declaration and consequential relief, it is contended that the appellants have purchased the suit schedule property from respondent Nos.7 to 13 under a registered sale deed and subsequen
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
