Karnataka High Court
K Mohan Rao vs B K Susheela on 18 March, 2011
Bench: V.G.Sabhahit, B.Manohar
...H'1'...
. .
EN THE §°éEG§'§ CQURT OF §{ARN.5%T£KA; 8ANGfi,.L§RE
BATEQ THES THE :§'§;"§i"' am' 9? MARCH
PRESENT
THE HOEWBLE MR. 3usT:t__c:.E_v.Gf«:§'A'8'eéi:g:~£:'T _'
AND
THE Hawmg EVIE:§:_3 '£';'-";§TZ(fEv~8:. ;"v.fA§'~{.?.:§F~§§i*a§1.
WRET A921-EA; NO. 4yO.iV:S".€)F:'.,u2O1.d '{QM»Ri:5)
BETWEEN:
SR1 K MoHm'*£;A.0 ._ 1
S/O LATE.-K'-».RAiC§H'A\:'E'NDR:A F_€A.<ff;') A
AGED 85?YE;-235' ' '-
R/ATBATLAVVAIU:-%\GE,--._"' ._ " "
MANGALURE. frA:_i"f:J:<_ %
DAKSHI-NA V:<;.:Nr\:A.:7TA"%vz)1;':%'r%:t2ma:
(By SRi %M¢\..Dj5:._uS--i,j MAMA RAG, ADV.)
.....
A j§_!\WI:'t§.:v:K»~4SL§:§'§.iEELA . swag: «E'T_:'_E_C§,fi\'SEB; BY ms LRS, S"r'vr;", =;<} BH}:xvANI RAG $1Nc.E 'DEcEA$E::x, av HES ms '7 ';,a SHARASA, AGED ABGUT ?8 YEAR§, 'SHARAQA ;ra;::_m';::' saw PGST, APPELLANT VIA §<ATE§?',5s,LLA, Qiiii, - 575 030' 2, JANA MOGRTHI REES, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, CHENNAI 3; SR1 MADHUSEJDHANA RAQ;
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, ;
ENDIAN OVERSEAS aAs\n<,1_ ' AZIZUDDIN ROAD, _ BANDfiR, *'H, MANGALORE - 575 30;,"-%.
DAKSHINA KANNAD/A._____ -
4. SR: B.N.}<uMAR~,. _ ;
AGED ABOUT 49 y'-EAR3,' MRuTHYMAGAR;~-J * { HOSAZBETTIL _ " ' SURA*3THE€f§L;, ~. : _V V _DAK'SH'IN'7!:\,VKAP3£FéADA..____v 5, SF2I.._'Wf;'%VNORA'MA.RfAO ._, W/Q"C:¥._URUvRA}'A RAG, AGED AB-OUT 58 YEARS, ' 5.-.SvH£x§{ADA NILAYA, _ .,BA£;.«.«'.~\ 'post, VIA KATIPALLA .,.r»1.A:~¢CaA,L1a3 RE TALUK, {3A';--:.S':+:1'NA KANNADA.
6. " .SH;ANTHA KUMARI ' mags ABOUT 54 YEARS, SHARADA NELAYA, BALA fiOS'£',VZA KATWALLA, MANGALGRE TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA, figgxo"
. .
'2» K gnaw:
mm AESUT 81 YEARS, §HflxRfisDfis f\IIL§"{A,, 3&3 PSST, 'aria £<ATIPALL«'?a; MANGALORE TALLEK QAKSHENA KAEMABA.
Q SACHIDAE'+iANE:hfi F-{AS gmca macmsea av HIS LRS '
8. 9 NITHYANANDA RAG"-._:"~~.
AGED AEQUT 6__O ¥EAR,$_ ' 9? P $ATHvA:\aANVL:>=A_V:7'R.A<:2 u V mm ABOUT 58 '~rEAr:=;3' V'
10. 9 \fIJ:§};"¥'}*x«§5s3V}"-';fxiD:.¢§_\ figs? AG_ED'-».S5?fY_Eg'ARSf'
11. %%9_VA;~c'.:x%$a':3"«:ggqo ,'* :1"?-A "
Ae'E9;}53 Y;g;:§s._ %#_g. EsP'o:\:VV;D*'fE'frg:?fs% "£0 11 ARE E~'?;fA"I' r3A1;A »'ILLA1*_c;E, MANGALQRE "¥_"AE;;;UK %% LADAKSMNA KANNADA -- 5?5 030.
[ ' $uMV§;éa<rHA _ "aw-,*.:3' .$uBRAMANYA gum' ""s£'GEE'ifA"BGUT 51 YEAR3, §E%é*.Z§<AR, smpg, = V-._'Mii:N'GALQRE TALUK 574 :42 EAKSHINA KANNADA, E &<_mw<:
D,/9 RAGHAVEf*s£DR§ mo A$E§ '24 '(EARS gym" Bfiifi VILLAGE, Mamaaasag TAm%< §§%i<SHi§'*éA KAEWABA, 3%.
-:4:« gmaevz W/G LATE SRIAATH1 RAE} AGED ABCEUT 5:: YEARS A/AT SUBRAYA SAUAN, NO 47, NEAR CHURCH, 3% BLQCK KATIPALLA POST, MANGALQRE TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA.
K RAMANATH RAG, SINCE DECEASED EY HI$ LBS, I5.
16"
17,, SHABARINATHA RAG AGED 45 YEARS' RAJESH RAG AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS."
SOWMYA v:NA%*"A7uMA£§=:.'i» 1' . AGED ABOUT 333v§r-EA;~"1.s, : ' "
,' "AESA;>E}!3£9é'AE'rs;:'Aabs. 1..§%O 17 ARE R/Aim:/Q R~AJ'E---s'H' RAG, 'THANDA.MBAIL;'--~SU§?.ATHKAL, M'A:$Jc3.AL0 RE1TA.LL_?K,
- DAK'3%_ff1F€.Av"KA'NN"ADA --~ 574 158. RAMA A'A'0A"'% A, E3/CLRAMACHANDRAYYA
-- ._ }'-¥.C5EDA.9'$ YEARS, é<Ai~s--..A\;éAR VILLAGE Sn POST, .E"EAf\§.;*3ALORE TALUK, VDAKSHINA KANNADA.
SR: 8 SUNDARA RAG S;/O R§MACHA7\NDRi\YYA, AGED 98 YEARS RETERED PATEL BALA VELLAGE, MANGALQRE TALUK D.fiA%<S§~fENA KANNASA.
-:§:w 23" a SANEEVA RAG S/G GOPALKRISHNAYYA, AQED ABGUT 87 YEARS RETERED SHANBHOGUE, BALA VILLAGE, MANGALURE "mw:< DAKSHENA KANNADA.
2:1" PSACHIDANANDA mo S,/C) VEERARAGHAVAWA, 1.
AGED ABQUT 90 YEARS, V KENJAR, BALA MANGA-vI,C'-RE "?"A:;-E.}K',~- DAKSHINA KANNADA. ~ §é.ESPQNDEmTs (By SR1 N JAGADISZHV,V~.§.[}~v,. f§}.g THI53_.; ..}SPfiEA L W3 4 OF THE KAi31NATf\_}.<»*3;:_44_"i;[iéFi }r;i(j§1':j;'rifr'%--v;ac:A"1g teimvms TO SET ASIDE mE; MMMM "O'Ri'.5ER THE WRIT PETITION No.1864Q/2QGé'V"D:AT§VD._21)"?/1O, '$1.313 WRIT~jAPP'EAL' COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HE§AVRING"'7_ifH1S.'-- §'AY", SABHAHIT 3., DELIVERED THE ?%§j:L.:,_c§'w*¢1_NG:" ..... 3 U S G M E N T
--._4':'§fsi_:3_ 73v,:>.9eaE is med by the unsagcaesgfui getitierser En §*§£{§V--j'Lj.%;_GV;'f:3;-5§Of2QO8, wherein we Eeamed séiégée Judge 3? %:§";£s,f.$@a:;*% hag &e::§En<-:--<§ is qLsas%'s: the award gaeggea' by the 74'\_:x'_. 2&-
~»:Es:~« Atbitratcirg (iiiiriiiexure E' t0 the writ petititsrg) éatefi 10iQ8.1§86; the endarsettient is$ue€t by the Suti~'-.RiEe§ti$trar, Matzgaisre, dated 116831988; the jucigertisggiéttt§t'>i§§L:--..;t§t;.§e~$ gagged by the Court at' the PI"'§._FYiU.mSifft,'HMV3§i:3:v3tCi'¥'E"_}xVC§éi'§é§'1 zomiiggg (imnexures ':-i' arid i»'i:o'tm4:~ Igit.s;-tt'i':>:icim disrriissitig i.A.I flied i:iy __ti--*-:.e wtii: jt)ettt'i»:§'hAé_t~-.{.afipeiia'ra.t' herein) under $eCtFt}FiS 3QAV_a::fi:ti:._3'3._VLA0fth'e:.:ArbVitration Act, 1940; in AA; N0,6i/1589:~.g;;i5A;.'tti'ét'V'§.i:iétéggfment and decree passed by tht--:~I_ Mangaiore; in RA, .f2t5--.CiV3f;vi'§t):é"t{Annexureg 'K' and 'if the order of the trial Ceuiit the appiication fiied by the appeii':aiit_'_4E"ietefi't2:
2, -{ "~--T_he appeiiant herein flied WP. i\E0.i1064{)/2008 the iegai heirs cf Baia Raghaveridra Rae itii:itit'}'i.ifig'"the appeiiant herein entered into an arbitratiaii " :::sg;_2feétr"2e:'2t datecf 06.09.1980 to get the dispute resolveé "°-- r'9e'jai*ding the executian at the Wiii af Ragtiaveridta Rae Htdated 15.03t;t§8G and the WEE? sf Ratizamma éataé 13.883378, which b€C8i"i'i8 Qgietatiiza after {F18 death at ; ii:
' )4' 3; A t .3? .
«:7:-
Reghevenére Rec» eee Reinamme. Raghavendre Ree died on :5.§3.198Q and Rathnemme déee on 30.(3E;'§;'»::I.$«?f_'T8'--VVeaz*"::d five Arbitratorg were appeénted by eee-s;ee§:'j"-'eeji*:e¥i"'---{fie Arbitraters submitted the aweefd....0_:; a"e'Vdve.;he'e< same was get registered en 1:;;'Q8.1i988.1'~.R'eé'eeéh<§Le-arizfe.:18 to 2: herein flied apeiEeei'fTe'r:~._befoé*e:t1*:e_ 3~'5$unsif§,L' Mangaiereg En A.Ca;__.No£6/A1.;'§8'9._;:rjeyieg"'fih_atA,,}the award dated 1038,1986 N0.613/88~89 on the fife pf-t__he Tafuk be made a (1.:-§e.~ t.%feI §x rVe§f'Eetion Act. In the said eippiicetion -« 1,1'-\.I/89 was rxsedebyeesizepaaepefEa,;§'te?e}x:e:esri under Sections 30 and 33 of the A'r";E5'if::_'I_fat:i_orVi' " for setting aside the award cf,.e.{:e'd ":1.O.O8V.§19V:8:§_.___Afhe fearned pee Munsiff by Order dated % "2Gj7G?%'A.'A1.9*9_A:5T';. dismissed 1.A.I filed by the appeeant herein VVé:ea{j_f--E.rrt§3.eE} the arbitratien award dated 1908,1986. 8:e§r}g"*«V.eg"§.Vrieved by the same, the appeiiant herein filed " $0.72/2004 befere the I Addi. District jiucfge, D,i<,, 'AA'-fiieegaiere, which was déemissed by Greer dates " ;':5K§3§2t'3G8. Seine aggrieved by the same; the eepeiéent herein fiiee WE ¥'\.Ie.1G64OX2€}G8 eentending met 2:he 3 s'- .
'x;~--»2: 5 'J:
»:8:~ Arbitreters had no: afforded Seffieierzt opeertzsrzétfg tie him ta put ferth hie eontentieeg, The Arbitraterg ha.9ge.jr'r=3:f"--E'§e§d the proceedings in aceerdance with 33W an_rj':-.ordfer7fe--f;'é:»,:~teey ef proceedings in the arbitration...rraatt€:'rV'€Qf;ra'e'Z, this Ceurt are 31.07/11986 in c:,eTr.p. ;é$;;o~."29i;=4,f1..ée§§ 3'e--s.e}E9--by the appeiiant herein and Eif:_e'~..same'r-rrasae_ec.mei}u'e%.ea?ted ts) the Arbitrators an tr3'a"t':~:theA..EAri3itrators Could not have giveee :rind'éi-n_g§':«,éig.r:rfi'é§4f'erje Rules.
3. 3. by the respondents by were appointed by c0ns:e_Ant;. foifowed the procedure and affordeci'\e;';§-f§;ciVé::f;;r' to the appeifant herein and aiéirhe parutfie-s _b_ef.c2re them and award passed is in . 1a--r:_r:0r:daru:e"with Eaw as per the terms of reference. The »5;~drerV'pé's%se§§e'§y the iearned Prl. Munsfff datee 29.911995 e§:;é1E§.irirg the award decree of the Court and dismissai ef "E;;,€x_:: fried by the writ petitioner (agpetiant herein), which 'AA'-§§"af:aeA~beer: confirmed by {he {earned I Adel, Dietréztt: luege "in eppeeé ~ RA, N032/2804 E3 justified am the writ eetitiee is zjeveie ef merit.
'=-
3' A /4"} x. w" 3/ e The ieernedf sirigie Judge, after eoeejii:iei<i.e'g,,'the cerstentiens of the iearried ceunsei eeps;:'a}~ririt;?':f{:sr;""t--iie, pattiee, by order dated Z7.{}§..?;i}1_Q, i.«;i¥5ii:z petétieri is eeveie at merit ; berth 1i_i_'iriée':tr'ia.i.VA'C.eezfteisriéiiithe first eppeiiate Ceurt tzaitei""~:enciii"rerati_yi'»v,he.!;<:i'"~»ti'iet the petitioner - eppeiiehi: was .efifc>r.gietii§ sufficient opportunity by the '~irijustic:e had been caused to finding on the question§.«.V..:dVid." for interference in eXe'Ci»'5~E3. Court. The iearned singie that the petitioner has filed OS. "c;t§eetioning the vaiidity of the Wili execiiited "tiiisv_____i§.ri.'fe - Karriaiavathy and the same is » ! §»€§IV'1L3'.iiij'i'(§'.N eejueicatien and accerdingiy, dismissed the writ aggrieved by the erder at the teamed si.i€gie"'v.Jiiéx:ge dismissing the writ petition, this eppeai is " tiiee the writ eetitiorzer.
S, We have heere the Iearrieé ceunsei epeeerieg fer the epeeiierit, ~:10:-
6. The Eeamed €ZGtiE'ES€§ aepearirie for the aepeiiant reiterated the arguments addressed befere the iearned eingie Judge and further submitted thaifztiedgtz centeetidns were taken regarding the vaiiditg/:i~~t;f.'_tb__e;i'taigtard ie View at the interim order granted by.Vtei"i'a..VCe.brtf;
31,e7.19e5, which aamttteaiy,; wag}:aramaenaieatevdt%i'tadie 7. Arbitrators on 11iO8,19£:39€~_'andA'----t_be jurbiS€i§.et'idn '31Qf"'itVh'ei» Arbitrators to give decEsion"Vt3»:3:._"the vai'id_i§';yi.;jf the Wili, the same have not beeréJCOnsi'd'ered by tbe"VVPrE. Munsiff Court or the learned sVVi'_:_j'tg!.eVV the order of the feardetd.'feieg,i>e'=.iiJ"d.g'e"t is Eiable to be set aside and the EiWVVE?.iifd' passeédt. Arbitrators dated 10.08.1986 be setV"a--sVi:d_e and ttensequentfy, the judgement and .A :'decreivAe'A..p--ae:~;e_d by the Prl, Munsiff, Mangalere, confirming a'i«.:Ead 'd.at.ed 1008,1986 and dismissing ma flied by tbe.p*etitIener, which has been upheld by the Eearried I ~ ,iid_tH.VvV'DiStriCt adage dated 25.03.2008 in R./at No.72/2004 ready afse be set aside.
A:}i1:~« ?. We have green zterefeé eerzeéderetéerete the eententions of the fearrzed {f.ZOE.IE"ES€§ epeeeririrg»..:'feVr"-,_the apeeétent erze scrutinized the materiai er: i" 3
8. The rneteriai eh reeere metre t;5.ee:':iy the petitioner -- appe¥Iertt"he'reVir: er:-:i__theV1rveee_e'r':~d»erits are the children of Rf_e.ghav;eerfaa:1ur'a.._ 'fltao .'a"rad._ Rathnammat Raghevertdra Rae, 'At3e_i_sff--.iVi:fe4ztirtze;executed a Wiii and Rathraamma 'ebcecutefl Rbequeathing the propertiejs.-~i§h the respendentst RaghvVaver_aer.ai:" and Rathnamma déedien fret disputed that the parents of the apépéiierttv arad '4t'h_e r:_eL.st4;§endents - Raghavendra Rae and R,at:hha.mrr:a; '<:t:.::r§_r:_Hg_.their fife time had executed separate .A:WiV¥vIs._Aeee.tie.a.thEhg their properties; in favour of the LR2a'r3;:z'eEVVI'er%_t'rj--..aetj'$. the respondents and after the death of Re"gha*{rehttra Rae and Rathnamma, the said Wéfis became 'eeerative. Since there was dieeute emehg the apeeiient 2'-Zettrzet the reseenderzts; regarding the deveévement ef the eroeerties as per the 'mile executed by theér pereratef it wee agreed that the matter shefé he referred tie the ._ ,«\ *3 K' /~ \_ L?'