Karnataka High Court
Annappa S/O Shivarudra Ammanagi vs The Executive Engineer (Ele) on 21 February, 2014
Author: N.Kumar
Bench: N.Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21st DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR
WRIT PETITION Nos.69415 - 69416 OF 2012 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN
ANNAPPA
S/O SHIVARUDRA AMMANAGI
AGE: 66 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. KOTABAGI
TQ: HUKKERI ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE)
MAJOR WORKS DIVISION,
K.P.T.C.L.,BELGAUM ... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI: B S KAMATE , ADVOCATE)
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
2
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED:03/09/2012 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND
J.M.F.C, HUKKERI, ON THE INTERIM APPLICATION NO.9
FILED UNDER ORDER 16 RULE 1 AND 2 AS PER
ANNEXURE-A.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
These writ petitions are challenging the order passed by the trial Court, which has dismissed the application filed by the plaintiff to reopen the case to summon two witnesses and to examine them.
2. The suit is one for mandatory injunction to remove the construction laid down on the suit property. Plaintiff has adduced evidence and he has closed his side. Defendant has also adduced evidence. It is at this stage application is filed to issue summons to the witnesses and to examine, according to the plaintiff to speak about the damage caused to the plaintiff because of the illegal acts of the defendant. Their evidence would be relevant and 3 necessary, if the plaintiff has claimed any compensation in the suit. Prayer No.2 in the prayer column shows that he is seeking consequential relief of mandatory injunction directing the defendant to pay compensation to the plaintiff for the damages caused to him and failing which the same shall be recovered under due process of law.
3. Plaintiff has not quantified the compensation. He has not paid any Court fee. No mandatory injunction can be granted directing to pay compensation. Under these circumstances, the trial Court is justified in dismissing the application filed by the plaintiff. No merits. Dismissed.
SD/-
JUDGE Naa