Smt Prathima vs Smt Vinaya R Achar on 29 November, 2019

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Prathima vs Smt Vinaya R Achar on 29 November, 2019

Bench: Krishna S.Dixit

                            1

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019

                        BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

         WRIT PETITION NO.49802 OF 2019 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:
1.     SMT.PRATHIMA,
       AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
       W/O LATE JAGADEESH ACHARY,

2.     SRI.PRAVEEN,
       AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
       S/O LATE JAGADEESH ACHARY,

3.     SRI.PRAMOD,
       AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
       S/O LATE JAGADEESH ACHARY,

4.     SRI.PRATHEEK,
       AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
       S/O LATE JAGADEESH ACHARY,

       ALL ARE R/AT OPP: PADMAVATHI
       KALYANA MANTAP,
       BEEDINA GUDDE, MARUTHI LANE,
       UDUPI - 576 101.
                                         ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.PRASANNA V.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT. VINAYA R ACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
W/O SRI.RAMAKRISHNA ACHAR,
R/AT RAGI HOKKLU,
HEBRI VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 132.
                                       ... RESPONDENT
                                 2

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 07.09.2019 ON I.A.NO.19 IN O.S.NO.53/2013 PASSED BY
THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, KARKALA,
REJECTING THE SAID APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT OF THE
WRITTEN STATEMENT, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE - A AND ETC.,

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

                            ORDER

Petitioners being the legal representatives of the defendant in an injunctive suit in O.S. No.53/2013, which later is converted into a suit for specific performance are knocking at the doors of writ Court for assailing the order dated 07.09.2019, a copy whereof is at Annexure-A, whereby their application in I.A. No.19 filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC, 1908 for introducing some amendment to the written statement as to the admissibility of the document in question has been rejected by the learned Senior Civil Judge and ACJM, Karkala, for want of alleged registration

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and having perused the petition papers, this Court declines to grant indulgence in the matter inasmuch as the plea now sought to be introduced in the written statement falls purely within the realm of law and therefore, such an amendment is 3 neither desirable nor ordinarily permissible; "Odger on Pleadings" states that the pleadings should be miles away from law and confine to the facts of the case and facts relevant to the facts of the case.

In the above circumstances, this writ petition being devoid of merits, is rejected in limine.

However, it is open to the petitioners to urge the points of law as to the admissibility of the subject document in the course of hearing of the suit, absence of a pleadings notwithstanding.

Sd/-

JUDGE MBM

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court