Karnataka High Court
Gokuldas Bhat vs Venataramana Temple Katpadi on 26 August, 2013
Author: H.G.Ramesh
Bench: H.G.Ramesh
-1-
W.P.No.31496/2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO.31496/2013 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
GOKULDAS BHAT
S/O LATE ARCHAKA VARADARAJA BHAT
AGED 72 YEARS
ARCHAKA OF SRI. S.V.TEMPLE KATPADI
R/AT S.V.TEMPLE ROAD
KATPADI, UDUPI TALUK & POST
KATPADI ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI S. RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. VENKATRAMANA TEMPLE KATPADI
UDUPI TALUK, REPRESENTED BY
MANAGING TRUSTEE : K.RAGHUVEERA KINI
S/O K. PADMANABHA KINI
MAJOR, HINDU
R/AT KATPADI OF UDUPI TALUK
KATPADI POST
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 105
2. VASANTHA MADHAVA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
S/O LATE ARCHAKA MUKUNDA BHAT
R/AT S.V.TEMPLE SQUARE, KATPADI
UDUPI TALUK & DISTRICT - 576 105
3. PURUSHOTHAMA PAI
S/O LATE KRISHAN SANTHA PAI
AGED 80 YEARS
R/AT MOODABETTU VILLAGE
UDUPI TALUK, KATPADI POST
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 105
-2-
W.P.No.31496/2013
4. PALLI GOPALAKRISHNA NAYAK
S/O LATE PALLI PADMANABHA NAYAK
AGED 72 YEARS
R/AT KATPADI, UDUPI TALUK
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 105
5. SRI K. RAGHAVENDRA KINI
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
S/O LATE MADHAV KINI
MOODABETTU VILLAGE
N.H.17, KATPADI
UDUPI TALUK - 576 105
6. SRI PANGAL GOVIND NAYAK
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
S/O LATE PANGAL VENKATRAYA GOVINDA NAYAK
NAYAK'S HOUSE, YENAGUDDE VILLAGE
KATAPADI, UDUPI TALUK - 576 105
7. SRI PANGAL VASUDEV SHANBHAG
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
S/O LATE PANGAL MADHAVA SHANBHAG
NEAR VIJAYA BANK PANGAL
UDUPI TALUK - 576 105
8. SRI K. SATHISH KAMATH
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
S/O SRI K. PUNDALIKA S KAMATH
SHIRVA, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 105
9. SRI B. KAMALAKSHA SHENOY
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
S/O LATE B. RAGHAVENDRA SHENOY
M/S. RAGHAVENDRA STORES
KATPADI, UDUPI TALUK - 576 105
10. SRI K. PRABHAKAR SHENOY
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
S/O LATE K. JAGANNATH SHENOY
POSAR, MOODABETTU VILLAGE
KATPADI, UDUPI TALUK - 576 105
11. SRI K. KRISHNARAYA KAMATH
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
S/O LATE K. SUBRAYA KAMATH
-3-
W.P.No.31496/2013
MOODABETTU VILLAGE
KATPADI, UDUPI TALUK - 576 105
12. SRI K. BABURAYA KAMATH
MAJOR, S/O LATE K.PURUSHOTHAMA KAMATH
POSAR, MUDABETTU VILLAGE
KATPADY
UDUPI - 574 105
13. SRI K. SATYENDRA PAI
MAJOR, S/O K. PURUSHOTHAM PAI
MAIN ROAD, MOODABETTU VILLAGE
KATAPADY
UDUPI - 574 105
14. SRI K. GOKULDAS SHENOY
MAJOR, S/O LATE RAMANATHA MADAVA SHENOY
POSAR, MUDABETTU VILLAGE
KATAPADY, UDUPI - 574 105 ... RESPONDENTS
WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 14.6.13 PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
UDUPI, PASSED ON I.A.NO.VI IN O.S.NO.127/04 VIDE ANNX-A.
WP COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral):
This writ petition by plaintiff no.2 is directed against an interlocutory order dated 14.06.2013 (Annexure-A) passed by the trial court in the suit in O.S.No.127/2004 dismissing I.A.No.6 filed by the plaintiffs under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC to implead -4- W.P.No.31496/2013 respondent Nos. 12 to 14 herein as defendant nos.12 to
14.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the impugned order.
3. I have examined the matter in the light of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Surya Dev Rai vs. Ram Chander Rai (AIR 2003 SC 3044) relating to exercise of jurisdiction under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India pertaining to interlocutory orders passed by courts subordinate to the High Court.
4. In my opinion, the impugned order does not suffer from any error of jurisdiction or error apparent on the face of the record to warrant interference under the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.
5. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order impugned herein as provided under Section 105 of -5- W.P.No.31496/2013 the CPC before the Appellate Court in the event of his filing an appeal against the decree to be passed in the aforesaid suit.
Petition dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE hkh.