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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 10732

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
ASHOK S. KINAGI, J
SMT PREMANANDINI W/O MASANAIAH, MASANAIAH S/O CHUNCHAIAH – Appellant
Versus
SMT VENKATAMMA W/O HOSPITAL RACHAIAH – Respondent
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1103 OF 2013 (INJ)



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SUNITHA K, SRI. RAJA L.
For the Respondents: SRI. RAVI PRAKASH, SRI. S RAJESH

The court allows withdrawal of the suit, enabling the appellants to file a comprehensive suit, following precedent.

Headnote:This judgment addresses the withdrawal of a suit under the guidance of the ruling in Anathula Sudhakar Vs. P. Buchi Reddy (2008) 4 SCC 594. The appellants consented to the withdrawal, leading the court to dismiss the suit with liberty for a comprehensive suit if desired. The appeal was thus disposed of.

Judgement Key Points

The case of Anathula Sudhakar Vs. P. Buchi Reddy (2008) 4 SCC 594 establishes that when a plaintiff or appellant seeks to withdraw a suit or appeal with the court's approval, the withdrawal is generally granted, and the suit or appeal is dismissed with liberty to file a comprehensive suit if desired. This principle aims to prevent the dismissal from being considered an adjudication on the merits, thereby allowing the parties to reassert their claims through a new, complete suit at a later stage (!) .

In the provided legal document, the court followed this guiding principle by allowing the withdrawal of the suit with the appellants’ consent, and dismissing the suit with liberty for the appellants to file a comprehensive suit in the future (!) . The court’s decision aligns with the established legal approach that such withdrawal does not constitute an adjudication on the merits and preserves the right of the parties to pursue their claims through a new suit if they choose to do so (!) .


Table of Content
1. context of suit withdrawal (Para 1)
2. consent for withdrawal (Para 2)
3. dismissal and resolution of appeal (Para 4)

ORAL JUDGMENT

Learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff filed a memo seeking leave of the Court to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a comprehensive suit, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Anathula Sudhakar Vs. P. Buchi Reddy (dead) by legal representatives and others reported in 2008 (4) SCC

594

2. Learned counsel for the defendants/appellants has no objection for withdrawing the suit.

3. Memo is placed on record.

4. The suit is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a comprehensive suit if so desire.

In view of the withdrawal of the suit nothing survives for consideration in the appeal. Accordingly, appeal is disposed of.

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 Back to top