Karnataka High Court
Ramachandra S/O Shriman Kolkar vs Ningappa Dattatraya Kolkar on 28 August, 2013
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda
Bench: A.N. Venugopala Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO.63619/2010 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
RAMACHANDRA S/O SHRIMAN KOLKAR,
AGE:42YRS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,,
R/O AMBDEKAR GALLI, KANBARGI,
TQ & DIST:BELGAUM.
... PETITIONER
(By Sri. SANJAY S KATAGERI, ADV.)
AND
1. NINGAPPA DATTATRAYA KOLKAR
AGE:52YRS, OCC:SERVICE.
2. RAMACHANDRA DATTATRAYA KOLKAR,
AGE:52YRS,OCC:SERVICE,
3. DASHRATH DATTATRAYA KOLKAR,
AGE:45YRS, OCC:PRIVATE WORK,
4. RAJENDRA DATTATRAYA KOLKAR
AGE:44 YRS, OCC:PRIVATE WORK,
5. SUDARSHAN DATTATRAYA KOLKAR
AGE:41YRS, OCC:PRIVATE WORK,
6. NAGAWWA DATTATRAYA KOLKAR
AGE:79YRS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
2
7. MAHADEVI W/O RAVINDRA
HINDALAGEKAR,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O HINDALAGA, TQ. & DIST: BELGAUM.
8. MAHADEVI W/O SHRIKANT KOLKAR,
AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
9. SUNITA W/O YALLAPPA DEMATTI,
AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
10. ARUN S/O SHRIKANT KOLKAR,
AGE: 18 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
11. SARITA D/O SHRIKANT KOLKAR,
AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
12. MASTER MARUTI S/O SHRIKANT KOLKAR
AGE: 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
(PETITIONER NO.11 & 12 BEING MINORS
REP. BY M/G NATURAL MOTHER PETITIONER NO.9)
ALL ARE R/O KANABARGI,
TQ. & DIST: BELGAUM.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M.G.NAGANURI, ADV.)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 19/04/2010 IN MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL
NO.20/2009, PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE
(SR.DN.), BELGAUM, AS PER ANNEXURE-K HEREIN AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
P & SC 25/08 filed by the respondents under S.276 of the Indian Succession Act, in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Belgaum, for issue of probate of a Will dated 15.02.1980 having not been contested, was allowed by an order dated 25.10.2008 and a probate was directed to be issued. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner, who was not a party in P & SC 25/08, filed M.A.20/2009, under Order XLIII Rule 1 of CPC. Since there was delay of 142 days, an application was filed seeking condonation. Since statement of objections was filed to the application seeking condonation of delay, while considering the said application, learned Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) Belgaum, having noted the contentions urged with regard to the maintainability of the appeal, has held that the appeal itself is not maintainable. However, he did not decide the application seeking condonation of delay. The appeal having been dismissed, this writ petition was filed.
2. By an order dated 16.04.2012, the matter was placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice for constitution of 4 an appropriate Bench, to consider and decide the question formulated therein. The Full Bench having been constituted, the question has been answered. It has been held that the Division Bench decision in the case of MISS PRESSY PINTO Vs. RONY MAXIM PINTO AND OTHERS - (2010)1 KCCR 536 (DB) does not require re-consideration. The Full Bench view is reported in ILR 2013 KAR 17 (SRI RAMACHANDRA Vs. NINGAPPA DATTATRAYA KOLKAR AND OTHERS).
In view of the above, Sri S.S. Katageri seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition and file an appeal. Submission of the learned counsel is recorded and the petition is disposed of accordingly, leaving open all the contentions of both the parties.
The time spent in prosecuting this writ petition shall stand excluded if an appeal is filed within a period of four weeks.
No costs.
SD/-
JUDGE sac*