Khaleel Ahmed @ Sr Citizen S M Hussain vs The Secretary The Govt Porcelain ... on 28 January, 2009

[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Khaleel Ahmed @ Sr Citizen S M Hussain vs The Secretary The Govt Porcelain ... on 28 January, 2009

Bench: K.Bhakthavatsala

W P No.665W2008

1

19% THE man coum or KARNATAKA A'?   L-é  "

DATED THIS THE 23115 DAY OF'_.JANUAR_YH »'    

1-in Karim ma.  
WRIT PEFYPION  

BETWEEN:

Khalcel Al1mcd@

S10 M Hazarat Sah§cb,"    
Age: 64 ywrs, R/at rqo;i_1:;_11,' '  
Nagappa Block,' ----    "'I::,  "

(By Sri Y K Na1'ayau"_z_; an a"m. a   for pet1Bo' ' net)

1. The   _
The  Fagtigry

 V   
'Ei'ac1m'y Pmxiaiscs  Prensa),
_ Box No. 1245:,

:xidsau_z'nstitutc"o£ Science,

  C§i:t€le;«Ik1<iiai1.Insti£11te of Science 9.0.,
   012.

 'V  A Dr.'  Iyengar,
 S-[v6"}a£t': Rangaswamy Iycngar,
 87 years,

RV/at New No.54, 01:} No.30,

 



  

W P No.6652i2008

163* Cross, 11*'! Main,
Bangalore-55. I

3. 

Magor,

Employee of BH EL,

Porcelain Division,

F P D Premises, V  

Post Box No. 1245, -   _ 
Indian Institute ofScienoe P.O.,  A  A
Maﬁeshwaram,    _  '
Bangalore---560 012,  I

W/o B W Ramanng Cimvda,' '  
Major,  . . ' .  'A     
No.91!)-A, W 'A'   
WCR 1! Stage, '-- ' V "  %   
Basaveshwaranagar, '  ' '
Bangalre-660 086_.  _

Row  at No.3 19,1'
West of cmm  _

T Respondents

M/3. Associates, Adv., for 124,3 and 4) "(B'y'_Smt~e_.S Nagoor Roja, Adv., for respondents) nu-an Writ Petition is mad under Articles 226 G5 227 of the VTLL'-ﬁ (3<3I13titutio11 of India, praying to quash the order dated 192.2% on I.As.12 a.-ad 13 in O S No.1206/1998 by the Court of VI! "Addl. (I3ivi1Judge, Bangabre City (OCH No. 19) as per Azmexure---L and allow the said LA-13 and dism1'ssl.A~12. w 9 Na.6652/2608 . This Petition coming on forpxe11mIna1y' ' ' V' Court made the following:

The petitioner/pLaiz1tiﬁ' in no; of City Civil Judge at Bangalore City, praying for qumhing the order dated' and XII! in the aboveﬁaid mm at V. .

2. " _;':)e1:it:ioner submits that the petitioner has ﬁled respondenm for declaration that he isﬁlle site acquired under 2: registered sale and also to declare that the sale in respect imjthc seit-- elite' 'eafendant No.1 in favour of defendant N0s.3 cemmenoement of evidence on the side of the thedefeizdants med LA-XI! under Order VII Rule 1 1 of c P /1 of the Cmopexative Soc1e'tu:s' ' Act for re3ect1on' ' of V the plajnﬁﬁ ﬁled an appﬁeation under Order 17 of C P C seeking permission to amend the piaint and delete prayer (b) and (:5), but the trial Court, without considering LA- ?

E K. W P 140.6652/2093 4 XIII consﬂemd LA-XII and allowed the consequence ofwhiach rejected I.A~»XIII] aII_1cxV1d_1ncn'i" " . by the petitioner. In other words, the Counsel for the peﬁﬁmner is that ha?' tige * pe1Im'tt;m' g the plainm" to amend the pféygr am «Eek-.§-.¢' ﬁmg-er (b) am

(e) of the plaint, LA-XII ﬁled a¢£:"ndgzgt"«wou1a mve become . E ctuous_ i -. I .

3. Learned submits that she has no objection allow IIII I' I1. I

4. Than; for the trial Court to allow LA- XI§i]an1end:1;'ae;;t: by the plaintiﬁi The trial Court erréd and cavalier approach.

In4"v71c§¢:o.f4'the above, the Writ Petition is allmmd and the 631:1: dated 19.2.2003 pawed on I.As.XII we! xm in 0 5 " ]I~''rso,12oé',{ on the ﬁle of City Civil Judge at Emmy;-c City, is Conscqucnﬂy, i.A-X.'!II med by the pctiiimcr/pmn@' tmdar VI Rule 17 of C P C, is allowed pcrmitIm' g the plminﬁﬁ to [V W f' No.6652J2003 5 amend the plaint, as prayed for. in View of the sought for by the p}ain'!:iﬁ', LA-XII ﬁled l§»y"'defcn¢:?:_:a:e:z_t;. HI2<')1; ' surv1v' as for consideration and the same 'V costs.

The trial Court The parties an:

directed to appeag-"'b1£_fpiA§?v~ fmrther proceedings on 24.2.2009, " -

3d/5%» Iudﬂ

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court