Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Dr N Damodar Shetty vs Sr Humbline on 5 July, 2012

Author: Ravi Malimath

Bench: Ravi Malimath

                          1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

             ON THE 5TH DAY OF JULY 2012

                       BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH

        WRIT PETITION NO.22632 OF 2012(GM-CPC)

BETWEEN :

DR N DAMODAR SHETTY
S/O SRI N K SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
RESIDING AT BHARATHI NAGAR
BEJAI,
MANGALORE - 575 004.                   ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI GANESH BHAT Y H, ADVOCATE)

AND :

1   SR. HUMBLINE
    D/O MR ALPHONSO D'SILVA
    AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
    MOTHER SUPERIOR
    CAPITANIO CONVENT
    CAPITANIO, KANKANADY POST
    MANGALORE - 575 002

2   SR. ANITHA
    D/O MR JEROME PINTO
                              2

     AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
     INCHARGE SUPERINTENDENT
     CAPITANIO, T T I CAPITANIO
     KANKANADY POST
     MANGALORE - 575 002.               ...RESPONDENTS

     THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 18.6.2012 AT ANNEXURE-E IN
OS.NO.999/2010 PASSED BY THEIII ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE &
JMFC, MANGALORE D.K., ON THE MEMO DATED 24.2.2012
FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS.

    THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

                         ORDER

The plaintiffs-respondents filed a suit directing the defendants to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as damages to them and for permanent injunction prohibitory injunction and consequential reliefs. During the pendency of the suit a memo was filed by the plaintiffs to hold the cross- examination of the plaintiffs in camera. The trial Court by the impugned order allowed the same. Hence, the present Petition.

3

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and examined the impugned order.

3. In the memo filed they have stated that P.W.1 and P.W.2 are religious nuns. The case is posted for cross- examination. Since the allegations made by the defendant is defamatory and embarrassing, it would be appropriate that the cross-examination takes place in-camera. The trial Court has accepted the memo by passing the impugned order. The reasons assigned are just and proper. I do not find any error committed by the trial Court in passing the impugned order. The Petition being devoid of merits, is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE RSK/-