Karnataka High Court
Mr. Virupakshappa G M vs Sri K R Shiva Kumar on 17 November, 2023
Author: S.G.Pandit
Bench: S.G.Pandit
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:41191
WP No. 25089 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 25089 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
MR. VIRUPAKSHAPPA G.M.,
S/O MAHESHWARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT NO.1946/22,
16TH CROSS, VIDYANAGAR,
DAVANAGERE - 577 005.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. UNNIKRISHNAN M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. K.R.SHIVA KUMAR,
Digitally S/O LATE SRI. K.B.RUDRAPPA,
signed by A AGED 71 YEARS,
K
CHANDRIKA R/A DOOR NO.1990,
Location: PURANTAR HOSPITAL ROAD,
HIGH MCC A BLOCK,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA DAVANAGERE - 577 001.
2. SRI. K.R.PRAKASH,
S/O LATE SRI. K.B. RUDRAPPA,
AGED 61 YEARS,
R/A DOOR NO.1990,
PURANTAR HOSPITAL ROAD,
MCC A BLOCK,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:41191
WP No. 25089 of 2023
DAVANAGERE - 577 001.
3. SRI. K.R.THIPPESH,
SON OF LATE SRI. K.B. RUDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/A DOOR NO.1990,
PURANTAR HOSPITAL ROAD,
MCC A BLOCK,
DAVANAGERE - 577 001.
4. SRI. K.R.VEERANNA,
S/O LATE SRI. K.B.RUDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/A DOOR NO.1990,
PURANTAR HOSPITAL ROAD,
MCC A BLOCK,
DAVANAGERE - 577 001.
5. SRI. K.R.PRABHU,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
S/O LATE SRI. K.B.RUDRAPPA,
R/A DOOR NO.1990,
PURANTAR HOSPITAL ROAD,
MCC 'A' BLOCK,
DAVANAGERE - 577 001.
6. SRI. P. MURALIDHAR RAO,
SON OF LATE SRI. P. NARAYANA RAO,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/O 1ST MAIN, 7TH CROSS,
K.B.EXTENSION,
DAVANAGERE - 577 004.
7. THE COMMISSIONER,
CITY CORPORATION,
DAVANAGERE - 577 001.
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:41191
WP No. 25089 of 2023
8. THE COMMISSIONER,
DAVANAGERE URBAN DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY (DUDA),
DAVANAGERE - 577 002.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SHASHANK SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.N.SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R6;
SRI.M.S.RAJENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5;
R7 AND R8 - SERVICE OF NOTICE DISPENSED WITH
VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 17.11.2023)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a) QUASHING THE
ORDER, DATED 07/08/2023, PASSED BY THE HONBLE FIRST
ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DAVANAGERE, I,.E.
ANNEXURE - A, IN I.A. NO. 37 IN O.S. NO.77/2015, FILED BY
THE R1 TO R6 AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE SAID
APPLICATION. b) TO AWARD COSTS OF THIS WP AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:41191
WP No. 25089 of 2023
ORDER
The petitioner, defendant No.1 in O.S.No.77/2015 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Davanagere, is before this Court aggrieved by order dated 07.08.2023 passed on I.A.No.37 allowing application filed by the plaintiffs under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC') and preventing the defendant from marking the Lease Deed and Common Compound Wall Agreement dated 20.02.2010.
2. Heard Sri. Unnikrishnan.M., learned counsel for the petitioner-defendant No.1 and learned counsel Sri. M.S.Rajendra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5 as well as Sri. Shashank Sridhar, learned counsel for Sri. N.Sridhar, learned counsel for the caveator/respondent No.6. Perused the writ petition papers.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the suit of the respondents-plaintiffs is one for declaration that Lease Deed and Common Compound Wall -5- NC: 2023:KHC:41191 WP No. 25089 of 2023 Kararu Pathra dated 20.02.2010 is void and not binding on the plaintiffs. At the stage of defendant's evidence, plaintiffs filed I.A.No.37 under Section 151 of CPC requesting the Court not to mark the document produced by the petitioner-defendant i.e., Lease Deed and Common Compound Wall Agreement dated 20.02.2010 as it is inadmissible. The trial Court under impugned order, allowed the said application only on the ground that the document which the petitioner-defendant produced is laminated document.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the trial Court could not have allowed the application and prevented the petitioner from producing the said document only on the ground that the document produced is laminated. Learned counsel relied on the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.18345/2022 dated 04.11.2022 and would submit that the trial Court ought to have directed the petitioner-defendant to -6- NC: 2023:KHC:41191 WP No. 25089 of 2023 delaminate the document and produce before the Court. Thus, he prays for allowing the writ petition.
5. Per contra, Sri. M.S.Rajendra, learned counsel for the plaintiffs though contend that it is the contention of the plaintiffs that such a document is not signed by the plaintiffs; they would submit delaminated document could be produced subject to objection and admissibility.
6. Taking note of the above submission and as Coordinate Bench of this Court considering similar contention, has observed that delaminated original document could be produced, the following:
ORDER
(i) The petitioner is permitted to produce original of delaminated Lease Deed and Common Compound Wall Agreement dated 20.02.2010.
If such delaminated document is produced, the trial Court to receive the same and could be -7- NC: 2023:KHC:41191 WP No. 25089 of 2023 marked subject to objection by the other side and its admissibility.
(ii) With the above, writ petition stands disposed off.
Sd/-
JUDGE SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45