Karnataka High Court
WP/30122/2025 of SRI JAYARAJ Vs SRI SUNEEL SIVARAMA PILLAI on 19 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010656612025 NC: 2026:KHC:52002 WP No. 30122 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 30122 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI JAYARAJ @ JAYARAJAN V.P SINCE DEAD BY
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 30122 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SRI JAYARAJ @ JAYARAJAN V.P
SINCE DEAD BY HIS L.RS.
1.
SMT. SAHIJA.K.K,
W/O. LATE JAYARAJ,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.
2.
SRI. ASHIN V.J,
S/O. LATE JAYARAJ,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
3.
MASTER ADHIK V.J,
S/O. LATE JAYARAJ,
AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS,
SINCE MINOR, REPTD. BY HIS MOTHER/
NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. SAHIJA K.K.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO. P-135,
8TH MAIN, LIC COLONY, HAL III STAGE,
JEEVANBHEEMA NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 075.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. LOKESH R, ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by
VINUTHA M
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
AND:
SRI. SUNEEL SIVARAMA PILLAI
S/O. LATE NEELAKANDAN SIVARAMA PILLAI,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/O. NO. 43, ANNAYAPPA GARDEN,
9TH CROSS, 6TH MAIN,
NEW THIPPASANDRA,
BENGALURU - 560 075.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. BHARGAVA D. BHAT, ADVOCATE)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 12.09.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED ON
IA NO. XV IN HRC NO. 33/2019 PASSED BY THE COURT OF
THE CHIEF
JUDGE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AT
BENGALURU (SCCH-1) AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE
THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
Learned Counsel for the petitioners has filed a joint memo along with the signatures of the petitioners and respondent, and the signatures of the learned counsel for petitioners and the counsel for respondent.
HC-KAR
2. The memo reads as under: "i) The Petitioners above named state that they are the Respondents and the Respondent herein is the Petitioner before the trial court in H.R.C. No. 33/2019 on the file of the Court of Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes at Bengaluru (SCCH - 1). The Petitioners herein have approached this Hon'ble Court in the above proceedings challenging the order passed by the trial court on an Interlocutory Application filed by the Petitioners herein for amendment.
ii) The Petitioners submit that during pendency of the present petition, both the Petitioners and Respondent herein have agreed to settle the matter amicably and have also agreed to file a compromise petition before the Trial Court in H.R.C. No. 33/2019. In terms of the compromise agreed to between the parties, the Petitioners herein have agreed to vacate and handover vacant possession of the Petition Schedule Premises to the Respondent herein on the date of filing of the compromise petition before the Trial Court and the Respondent herein has agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 3,70,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Seventy Thousand only) to the Petitioners towards full and final settlement of all claims. It is further agreed that the Respondent herein expresses his consent and No objection The Parties further agree that the Petitioners herein have deposited rent of Rs. 1,30,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty Thousand only) before the Trial Court and the Petitioners shall be entitled to withdraw the same alongwith the interest accrued thereon if any, for which the Respondent has no Objection and expresses his consent.
iii) In view of the settlement so arrived at between the Parties, the Petitioners are not interested in prosecuting the above petition. Hence, the Petitioners pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased
HC-KAR
to dismiss the above writ petition as withdrawn in the interest of justice and equity."
3. In the view of the memo, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE VN List No.: 4 Sl No.: 3