Karnataka High Court
C J Aranha S/O R Aranha vs N Lakshminarayana Holla S/O Late ... on 2 July, 2008
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice
.......... vr ...-.m..mM ruuu uuulu or KARNATAKA HIGH COURT os= KARNATAKA ms:-I
IN TI-E EEG}! CC3UR'1' QF' KARNATAICA AT BANGAIDFE
mama ms Tim 280 DAY 01? JULY, 2 A
BEFG%
Tm HGNELE pm. JUSTICE A.m.wmmpm
WM!' EEECIH m:.9523gF zaavégtém-CF51 * é
E
C.J.
S}'OR.ARAHHA.
mmnammvamsm,
ago-*ummwmw,«i' _
IfiANG:ALCrRE,D.'K. A PETIFIOXER
(Hiram. v.KV;EHATglia§.nvvc>cp%A:ij_'
E31
2., N. Hum
'ago
% =.AGgE12{ fi..""'$§3I.§"i'. j;fa.Y%.
2,. u.mmsm--m HGLIA
846 H. PBSLLA,
.mEm'Aa{:'i§22sa 'mm.
' " " '1'%.as,..a"z:V--1é;o momaxam,
% % mm VITLLAGE,
mgr,
__"mc;.§:;m*§*1¢zIc*2'. RESPORDENTS
% 1' A j : % mmmm: Ismmza BEAT, mvnmm
IIIIVIII Vuu1ulIuiI\I \fI l\l"'ll\IIr'IIr'II\l"'l IlI\Ill \a§llII\l \.lI l\l'll\I'Il'|ll'|l\]-\
Iu\.7u \..-uunl \.l[' Iv-\!\IVu-uHI\H |""II\JI"1 MUUKI VI' AHKNAIHKA HIGH UUUKT OF KARNATAKA
Writ Petitian is fimi unée: Articles 226 and
af zm Ccnatimtimn af mm, praym to issue. a writ Qf
cesrtziarari quashing the ardm
afiawing §.A,Em2 and 3 passed 1:57 the Prl. C5311 _
Dn.], . E.K., in 0.8.159. 129;' 1998 vile "
(3: am filwreby rsejact the said appficafiaga with et.c.~ _
3% ?e§i'5wB. on E32"
the Cam. mafia thfi fclkwwing:-»
onngkf%,
Peu':*mm~;p1mm"' ' %{:3§J$.N%§L.1i:qi199a agam 2
thé reapwasxdientsf cf a sum
afRs.3,'?T;'v,G€)fij5-_? V-um: pad' and the
ixitecrwt " agwmt af sale
data 15,:v.1*::m The d have
%ra& court thmugh the mumel
wmm' """ H amtamazrxt 12:: the suit was not
for , afizer hm;-am tlm
TV sf wunscl far the p1a?aatifl'. Bcf:-me
'igfi%®g®£mmMbawmmmmiflw&fimhmsmfi
flw@m@mmmmmmmmmmwmo
th»:-: was fiat tm purpose af the w1'itten
emmmmnIfifiwmfmdmflwfiwmflbwrmdfim
u
/
v. ...--.u. In-Iu.r\Iwr'I -uuu I-\JuI\! vs I\ru\|Vu-III-'II\l"I rllun Iuuulil U!' IVMKNHII-\lV\ HFUH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Socmn ml CPC ta cxmdcna rm delay Em filing the
statzmmfi and m reczeive the written statement
wm ma application. Both the appficatiana
by the pxamig. The ma: mutt has the, A
mic: éateci 315.20% azzowing M2
cost nfR*s.1,G%{- m be depnsimd
Fufi. fihafiangng the '_ orgiaé, has
bemfned.
2., Main mrztention 4:3? ; fat the
petinianezr £3 that, antjé
aypfic-atism either far fithw purpose
fiJJATI-IA in 3.3 1996 Km 553
ma am mg' 431* M. v. mm cwmmr
was gamma LTD reported in
caramel mntarfled that, the
ta-avian'!
a matwial error and an fllgaliiy,
an-ur-I
said am' inns amt in aflnwixag mam
\.
'
3. Per mantra, mm counsel fer the rimponxicmta
-:::o&nd-ed that', due to tlm reamxm atahed in the
in auppcvrri. af Li£s.2 and 3. the writtw
be E1-ad rearlim' Md into carajélerafixn V
shown awfl 1%: explanablan afibred
aaowa ms. 2 and 3, than nx:
irzixce in €11:-. wfrit p.1r1a-dmun' Learned
ocaunsel mntamideié ~ vzzfipfa, at; which,
reliance has czaumel fior tin
petitiwnerj %.§} 'figs case.
arm V£'.E.:1g; rs;'¢=;r:x3rr_ .% kg, in: , the mapugmd order
he » V
is that, the: suit had bun posted
': ;=m%yz§%%* g dam 1.35.2 and 3 mm filed in the mm
nus : sq...-v'uu\n vi I\al'1i'\i'J"'IIl"\I\.l"'| nn.'n"! uvunv ur nnnlvnlnnn FlI\.'!l'! khlulil VJ!" RHKNHIAKA HIUH COURT OF KARNATAKA
crdm", the trial court has recorded
the case is paste:-ad int I.Aa.2 and 3
nllflurll \uI€Iull\l VJ! l\l"'Iu:\l'.I""|ll"'Il\l'l it
i
Wm main It is else not in dispute that. the
have entamd appearance thraugh mammal on
am the writtma statement. was mt. filed and
pmbad fur judit on --%.'?.2fl€}€¥.
aflowad hy the: u-aal court, %at:e.A%%
decimn emf the I~I0n'b1e supmm.:%j%kijm«ur: of
KAMSH u. zmxsxmvzu ANI3J'::4§L3T}{£,cI:§:S;; 200.5
flIFREbfl- calm' 244:, that, the
period at' as czaya 1 cm to
fie the wxétzsn rm: mandatory.
Tm triai matcrial aspwt,
whether; aafier tlm min can it reopen
the mass, by or not. It has
mowed I.a.a;%%k2§&md %;§%% mo mnsfieration,
the deo::5§?m:::1 sf Court in the case of
.IDi§r'mian Bmnh in the maa of
% gg gggm; has new $3 fiufiawm
an-r-n was-anwu\u Iva -V-'u\Iur1I.r1u\r1 a|I\.a|I I.4}I \.a|\I VI I\l'll\IIP'|I.l'II\l'l I IIWII \.u\J\lI\I Vi' l\r\l\l'Il'\I!"|I\.l'\ l1I\7f'I \u\JUM Kl!" ERKIVHEHKH "I6" '
" if the mama is reserved fir
of judi1t, such an
1:5-:im '3 mt mm' mm' his as othezwm' a it
L
.--up
......'.y.. 1 -1\f'u-x- vu nu-nu u-up-nu-u ulnar! \.a\JIJl\F VI' RHRIVHIHNH l""lIL9I'| LKJUKI U3' KAKNATAKA
win defeat tha wry ohjwt at' amendmmt in
apeesdy disposal at' the macs.'
5. By the said aecmm, the dacisixm &
am :1: juvdgc 1:; the mac cf waanm fi6*aa* ;gppr¢V V I } 2
and dacisinn cf $413151' V.
the me. at' aamym Enmmasss v.
YM TEX1'EE,' 2009 am
'?. Era v.ien2t= Bench in the
oaseof én; is to be held that
the vial mgj 'ms jurisdicfin and has
acted witfx in 311::-wi.r1g 1.3.5 2 and 3
ward-at. fact, I have followed
in W; diapasad, of an fig A6 Emmbsaii
Eamh am act aaigan order
A man: tzaurt, gammg oppartunity to produce
da::u1nmta,af£er me mlit had ham posted my
cf t. me decisinn in the mm of
B3 Imssm M. (supra) aquaraiy appzisg./The trial
mm rm mmtztiritteci materiai ermr and umuty
a and ioaawzng the saici aacssam. Sixme
has akemy fpflowead the said deeisien of
Ema, z mm no mm.» aptisn than tq"éf3;3k,r
v::1.ec:.-fin and act. aaide thfi : ":
3. in ma mun, wrij;~..§r¢tj§§g§. cardecr
passed an £33» 2 in
O.3.E$o,E'3Q!1'§98 HjAév»§.az;:£io:x§af:%£*;i-4é1kf;};;dgc (Sr. 1311.],
@a1nm "E 3 are hm ta
33¢ 33% the auit im pasted
hr fi'€'#3m**a:.:.nr.:emsent af " '
9% at. Bhat, learned
£223" tfié stay flf 35$ order far a
paw' ti ' that the rwpandantas
Appeal in the matter. It 5.; cm1ter1ded
not grmacl, the trial court; may
nun Vuy_"\u'VIlI\I urn l\ru\IIrIIr\t\-I1 unanu uvunl we I\l"lf\l'l"'|Il'II\l'I rllwn uvunl U!' RHKIVMIMHH HIUN LUUKI U!' KARNATAKA
mt, wh1::h' will crzaate m3tiphmy" of
taunts! Inwnriwlisi Vail I\|P'IxI\I'fl"I!fl"II\l"I ll
"éflmd wfil mime Em; 22% way 5f the respondents
/ff