Smt Seethamma vs Sri Lakshmegowda on 20 April, 2012

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Seethamma vs Sri Lakshmegowda on 20 April, 2012

Equivalent citations: 2012 (3) AIR KAR R 329, (2013) 2 ICC 311

Bench: S.Abdul Nazeer

 

E 1 £&~
TN THE: HEGH COURT GE' RARRATAKA AT EANGALQRE
DATED THIS THE 2082 DAY OF' APRIL)  
BEFORE  V'

THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE~E3»..AB1Z}'IiI;N}'SZﬁ§E4I?{. 

WRIT PETITION NO.42O is/::5_;_<i)'1: 1 ::iPC)"V"L.jj" A .  _

BETWEEN:

sMT,sEETHAMMA, _
YIYEARS, V  5 _ ..

W/O LATE SRLB.G.SEET?iA.RP:M1:?, ;

To BE REPRESENTED BYE-IER  2 

BROTHER~IN~LAW AND GPA HOLIZER

SRI.B.G.NAGAR/RI,"-65 &ifEARS_;,= _  _ ~

s/0 B.M.GU'fTE<j;0\A.rDA;E  4_  " 

R/0 No.15-1';4'1r:r1wA;N;     

BCC LAYOUT, --BANGALORE§56OG40.  H.PETmoNER

'(ET)' SRIARA. A;:§§V\%'§jV

AND:

SR: .;:;AEsHATE~G_Qw15A;"35 TEARS,
sg»G.:.cHERNEG0'v:E:sA,A .

" - 'PRESE?NTLY..RES§DENG AT
» VB;*N1'EN'Eai~L§LL§' VILLAGE,
 'E;E.L':;R:4:sLA::TE3T:;RJ Rs:>AT>,

~B7E;L?JR'  ' ' '

T~:Ass3A\: §:S§TR:<:TT T,TRE:'5?'GNSEN'§'

~~  SR3 §;.R§%ﬁ§§SHA?*€Eiz%§§ §i;IIiV&}

 TETES 35$??? ?E'f§"€§Q?'§ ES §'ILED §§§'=§EES§ ARTECLELS 22$ 33:

"'22'T" GR THE EQNETTTTTRQR GE' TRETA. ERATTRG To QTTASR

GRDER EFWATES 3iCX§.28EE £3? QT:':§.8§%/2882 'ifiE}E z5§sZNEXE§RE--A

2 " GE'*€ EH3 E'§LE C}? VFEEE CGEERT C3? '§§é§Z Ciifii :j'§§§{}E §j§}E\EEOR

§iVfS£€3?~§} 3; JEXIEFC BELUR A'? BELUR,



i
E

 

THIS VJRIT PE'I'I'I'1ON COMING ON FOR  R'I'HER
ORDERS THIS BAY, THE: COURT PASSED THE FOI,IiO4WfIi\£§;}i~.V_

ORDER

The petitioner is the plairitiff on the file of the Civil Judge iéfevlfur the respondent is the defeiidgantti'-.;'I"heV 1ii1e.d"

plaintiff is for the defendant to dismahitleﬁ made by him by tresp42;sS_ing property at the cost other reliefs.

After learned counsel for the parties ;w'y.;:a»~é{ --§1;15;tu;er. When the matter was posted eeurt below has referred the rr1._3;§:teEri tca__MediatienCentre, Haesari under SE,ib~SECfi{}i1 L' .§{j»i:i;§~ ef the CPC fer amicable settiement sf tthewi by oréer dated :3€3.G§t2Gi 1. 'E'he g3€?i§EiI{3;i"i%;?§"/'§§8iit1t€§ff has eeiied tr: qaiestieri the Vaiidity Sf triﬁieézaiei erder in this writ petitierzi =;

E 2 .. 3 ..

2. Sri P,A.Kuikarr:L learned eounsei appearing for the peziiiioner submits that piaintiff hag n_0"éi$rgr"eed for referring the matter to Mediation Centre', not agreeable for the same. >-

3. On the otherli"~haI1eI., appearing for the respondperil'rhasfseughf"tojhstify the impugned arder.

4. materials on record that ':he pivéiihtiffrfpeti§r1'ene1>.Dhas nét' agreed for referring the rnai:ter»":0= i:he_~~"Cer:tre for reselution of ihe dispute. E;erefe;re,."£:he.re is US justification for the rrial eéart "reéfer matter is the Mediaiien Cehrre 893} 0? CFC stares that where i:

appears' the Sear: "éhai: there exiers eiemenis of 3 eetfﬁezrzerzi which may he aeeeprahie is the parriesa ihe ehaii ferrrruiate '{he 'terms sf ~Sii"5§ﬁ€}"Y2,€E§€L.. ahé give ' " Wézherrz ﬁe ihe perriee fer iiheér eheerveiiehe arid afier reeereérri {he ebeer<sa9f::Z<>r:e er {he perfzieeg ﬁre Carver? 1:135;

C!»-a WNW wmmW..m__.__ " cam; * .. 4 ..

referniuiate tha terms of a possibie sattlament aria refer the same for arbitration; Conciliation, judiciai %§é'tt1"e.:fiant including settlement through L01: Adaiath;-$1"

When the plaintiff is not agrc:'€'ab.1;e -for_.i°i€'i7é::riI1g.V the b matter to mediation, question bf 1"e:férring..itf1e the trial Court for mediati0t1--v.gj1'(;<:s not'-a1'iae_I'_:

5. In the resiuwixk succeeds and it is 30.09.2011 in O.S.N0.89 tIie"'CZivi1 Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMF Tha Trial Court is suit can its merits and in acccérdancé' Withv"iavi? as axpeditiousiy as possible-9 No Sé/Q» E3535,-9%:

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court