Sangappa S/O Siddappa Kurakoti vs Ramasingh S/O Umalu Lamani. on 9 August, 2012

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sangappa S/O Siddappa Kurakoti vs Ramasingh S/O Umalu Lamani. on 9 August, 2012

Bench: H.N.Nagamohan Das

                               1




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
             CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA

       DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012

                          BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.N.NAGAMOHAN DAS


              W.P.No.81338/2011(GM-CPC)


BETWEEN:

SANGAPPA
S/O SIDDAPPA KURAKOTI
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O KARAVINAL VILLAGE
TQ. SINDAGI, DIST. BIJAPUR

                                      ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI G.G.CHAGASHETTI &
 SRI I.R.BIRADAR, ADVOCATES)


AND:

1.     RAMASINGH
       S/O UMALU LAMANI
       AGE: MAJOR
       OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE

2.     SIRAPATHI S/O UMALU LAMANI
       AGE: MAJOR
       OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE

3.     SHASHIKANTH
       S/O UMALU LAMANI
       AGE: MAJOR
                             2




     OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE

4.   DHANASINGH
     S/O UMALU LAMANI
     AGE: MAJOR
     OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE

5.   SIDDAPPA
     S/O SHANKREPPA KURAKOTI
     AGE:MAJOR
     OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE

     ALL ARE RESIDING AT KARAVINAL
     TQ. SINDAGI, DIST. BIJAPUR
                                         ... RESPONDENTS


(BY SRI ASHOK S. KINAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R4,
 E2, R3 & R5 - SERVED, R1- SERVICE AWAITED)


     THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR
THE RECORDS. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, QUASH THE
ORDER ON I.A.NO.XII DATED 07.03.2011 PASSED BY THE PRL.
CIVIL JUDGE (JR. DN.) AND J.M.F.C. AT SINDAGI (DIST.
BIJAPUR) ON O.S.NO.15/2005 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G
AND ETC.

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


                       ORDER

Respondent Nos.1 to 4 filed O.S.No.15/2005 against the petitioner and respondent No.5 for recovery 3 of possession of plaint schedule property. After the completion of evidence, petitioner filed an application- I.A.No.XII under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC seeking appointment of Official Surveyor to measure the plaint schedule property and the related survey number. Under the impugned order, the Trial Court dismissed the application only on the ground that already survey report prepared by the ADLR Sindagi is produced in the evidence. Hence, this writ petition.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that survey report prepared by the ADLR Sindagi and produced before the Trial Court is a disputed document and against the said report, they have filed an appeal and the same is pending adjudication. In the circumstances, the Trial Court has to take note of these developments at the time of disposal of the main suit and while appreciating the disputed ADLR report on record.

3. In the circumstances and with the above observation, writ petition is hereby disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE NB*

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court