Sri C G Channa Keshava vs Ramaiah Since Dead By His Lrs Respondent ... on 24 February, 2011

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri C G Channa Keshava vs Ramaiah Since Dead By His Lrs Respondent ... on 24 February, 2011

Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy

IN THE HEGH COURT OF KARNA'LI}'~\KA AT BANGALORE

I)A'l'ED THIS 'THE 24m. my 01* FEBRUARY 

BEFO RE

THE }~iON'BLE MR.JUS'1'ICE RAM .}Vj1()ELLA£E¥:.:i1r2,~E::ﬁ:1)'3Y  "  

WRIT PE'I'1'I'ION No. 35785 {as 29   A ;  .'

$3 ETWE E-ZN:

E.

'rd

AL I  ~..QOKUL- §£X'I'I~3NSION, I3ANGAI,O RE:

SRE C G (if-IANNA KESHAVA 
S3,/O I,A'1'I5: GEMRAJA GOWDA__  
AGED A1-3OU'§'59 Y%i1ARS,  ' -

SRI(tGCE-%E'NNASWA§\?1AY A ' . 2

3/0 LA'i"E <_;:RIRAJAA.«::QW::)A._ 
AGED ABOUT5_6 YEJARSQ A L

SRE c  ._  
s/0 LATE _GEf{II%A~.}JX [email protected]«vi>.A,

AC'i}33i§' A3'~3&?;U'1" : --YI¥:A; 2:~3,
Sm'RA*1";iNA§,?z':\.g;x=.  

w,/ :32 VVLKIT GERIRAQEA "G-.<;iWr;5A
AGEE)' AB{"}U'I" 79 'YEARS,

4;E--'Efi7E'I'IOf\"sEiR§3 1 TO 4 ARE
.. 'i?z.;&\_{;:::1A:%€Nz&SAN--£}£m VILLAGE,
_ ' F31f}ARAE{A[..LE HOBLE.
* .. BAI_$I(:aA«:,(>'r:21=; stwm '§'AI,UK

  :x}1?:' Vé%:1aRzA;?.gA;;.1§';aIAKs1A1M":
'  'xv/0.133. M 1»: PUFvZ'£}fSi"~i(7J'E"I"€[11.,i\:E
 Ac;-{~31} ;»;'.:~3<>m .68 YEARS,

PM A jSUNI)ARNA(3AR,
BHUK/}'\NA NURSINC} HOME,

. . . PE§7.EfT"Fi{3NIE§'5{S

   gzjzév SR}. <3 :2 I,;xKsLTIM:§'}A-':*ET-ﬁr F~Z1££DEL)Y, 33317.}

32:5!

"Va.



x
%~.)
1

AND

"E . RAMAIAH
SINCEZ DE}-XI) BY HIS LR.
RI;3SE3C3NI3I:'IN'}' i\§O.2

Ex.)

SR? N R SRiKANTAI.AH
8/O I.ATE§ RA%VIAIi%.E'I
AGED ABOU"I' €50 YEARS.   ~

3. SR}  A NANJUE\EDAI.AE*§
S5/<3 JANAKA:'J§?«'§A _
AGED ABOUT 50 YTSARS, v '

 SMT J AE\EAKA1\4.I\/IA 
'W2' (3 ANf\;\!'F}--IARAf\/MIA}-1 3 7- 
AGED ABOUT 60 YT§:*§R_$, '

RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 :!\V}3ZE'/ "

R/A N5XC§()Nf§ANAE*1AI';I;I, ' _ KRISEINARE-¥J;XPUR;V3M _1?¥C }f3I,-1, ' V '_ ~ BANGALC)REjiiZAS'f TAILLJK, _ " V' BAN C;g3.I_;("5'I?..I:' ~--.. .. 5;

:3. MR K'Fl.E{§:£2\.N'7I _ :3;/0 N.AZEiE§.R...AI---{M1353V'i{fIAN.' AGECD ABGU E': YI;A{gs;' R/A §_\:C:.34', R.'\:._4;~:r>/ix~:)_, BAsAV_AN.Ac;£3;)1 2 * _ V .8AN(}AI;ORf?<ES€S{)€>{)4 2 " ~._ RE8§3€).NEi)E:N'I'S {«E33%L"s:R1;';"LN.r§_'<:;\4KARA1?PA_. ADV. FOR R2 IN T/C:

' . " -s§z1v.._vs;%.zx;5aAM1.Arm FOR R3 5;: R4 S3RI.,4E\§A(.;1X:*§AN'I). -SR. A1')V, FOR SR1 {EOUTAM & "E-Eﬁujiiiﬁﬂiﬁiéz, .A1:>v. FOR C/R5) ,.rI;I'T"ﬁSV'v}¥;.'P. IS FELED UNDER AR'FICI.,IZS 226 AND 22'? OF i'%:I.E, {f(5F€$'l.'I'.I"{.f'E"ION OF INDIA I?'RAYIE'~§"G TC) CALL FOR '1'}:1E " E§§§_{§_§.§)§{§>S A§'»$§f} §;§§._§:'xSI*I '§'E"iIi §§\!IP{.F{f}I.'*€E§D ECJREEER I.3A'Ii'§73If) E:§aE{}$2{*}.1{} E'v'EA.E:}{§ ON EA. §~$(}.3€:3 E? 0.5:}. N€§.§5E};' E995: GN '.i"§*IE§ Ki \ is F114,}: (3? TI~I'}EZ PRL. -EBFJNEOR CEIVEE. J{}§§)£}E§. §3AN{f}AI.,OR£§ RLTRAII, I.'}IS'§'RIC"I', E3ANGAI.OI-{E VIIDE AN§\§'IZX.[3'RE--I\v'I, CONSB3QI.?§;N'IE.Y :'--\.I.-I,OV'v' "HIE: '€'»?f5EI'.1" ."£3E*Z"E'I"1'"IOE\?. .'

-mzs w.1:>. IS CCDMING ON FOR c>Rr:>:«:Rs3 '{'T;Hf§ :3§§Ai"'==:*r{i'§a:e "

Ci{_'JUR",¥' MADEZ -'1'2~1£«: FOLLOWIE\EG:

$ The p.123.in.T;,iffs In o.s'.1e'e9/95'e'aﬁ'the pr}. ff. Senior Civil Judge, Banga1o'1ee"'R'u_r;1£ e§;gg1'iexred by the order cit. 8/'----1 Cr/ I.A.N0.35 and partly alioxxring t.Q the suit. as withdrawn,_ﬁ;1ve5p;"eee§1fed t.1_1_is=.petViti"0":1. . Fé1(:.t§% }:)1°i%.9f;fiy _ 'sé.,'c;1'1.ed :»119e':V F2_1ther'<)f.p'evtiti_e'i"1e1'S i11st._itu.i',ed 0.8.514/89 for speciﬁc pe::tb:IIiL1n ce of'.f;e.r1 agreement of sale ar1"aigning the ;E_e'e=*_1'espend'e'r1t V215 the W1 ciefendeinh which was 0.1%,. i'::3I1ow'1:1g which, the executing 'e,.o'i'1--;*.tA 3 sale deed c:<>I1veyi:1g the suit e~:eheduie i;319':§;3e1'xt3,w"";;;1 1 1 / 19597, $111155 sat;i.sfy*ing the decree. it é'§}§}'§'3*.('?Z?iI'§§ 'é.hzii. {he E-'*1 defe::2<§aI1?é aiong wit.h <:iefe.:1da.:*:i:s 2, 5% '$33335

3 and 4 {1*esp();'1ci€ntiss 2. 3 and 4) _}'0ir:t'1y er1{.ereci imio another ag"reeme.t1€:. cit. 16/1.2,/1.994 to c:(')nvey SE1I'I1€ suxit; strlaedule pI'()p€1"i1y, on ::eri:a.in aé::vcii"

::(>ndii'.ior1s out I:,}1eI'e1'n, Tha p<rt.ii.i(}«1':€r's:'{f~i:"£;::§i't<L1t::fci 0.8. "159/95 for specific: per1k)1'n1é11'1(.:€2--Qf thaaii.'..2igFC'tér:1_erE:'§.A and having come: to {heir I:'é{ii£;e t.}1'2:i:. Vfh-:2 1$1 ':i§;spVon:ien_t conveyed 3 acres axgci 16 J}qL1e$ii0:1 under sale deecls V 4/41 1996, reSp(-mtively. i:;.w.f";jv01,;.:"' fi}ed an appliceatiogy. if£')"'*'1'VV::fi~$ponde11t as 531 defencmlif: p'1'iir.:e1tioI1 was aﬁoxved and the 5?if._respeﬁ{ﬁie£§t :Vw*;§V'S%'iﬁpleaded as 5"' defendant. The petititnléxts 'havimm; "i:"s:1'C«:1";i' éipplication for amendment of the ;:*1.;?1i11t:"ﬂ:.aiV t11é% at-1d_i't:§<)z1ai reiifsf £0 deciielre the sale decjcifs £32111 :1:1cE.....void, 'W218 aliowed. The pei:ii:ion.ers _ .n@;ti_;?c€i --f§:$I*-r1f1a.i defectit in Eh:-3 frarne of "£:1":e --S'L1i'f'. more A~..gippi'Oi}fi'é1fZ€]§P*~ f§18 CaL1S€f of action in the suit which réi;}'f:t%d ag_»§1*<:€:me11t: e::o.f 5.4-aie cit. 16/12/1.994, arnti j 1m':'. .§l§:"£{":",'A'V(.'.E-§.!.~3_i'Ir's(".', 0:' agrtizsri fisr 'i'i"1€'3 a3:11<-mcgiésﬁ I"€;':§}:€E'f§ ﬁiésti

1.,»'«\.No'3€:'> under Order 23 Rule 1(.1)(3){a)&{b} of CPC 10 pmrnit the p€'E.ii1iCJI}€FS to Wiihdraiw the €1b{}Vf3 s11it:~.<<x%¢tith Eiberty to .file 21 Efesh suit agamsst: D5 to .

t0 the suit SCh€3£i11}€;'. pmpc-3rt:yV _1'}rp1 t:hc""i"i§g§(;~11 *0f"_t'r:.e 'r<3gist,e1éed saie deed cit. i*:.Q1j':3;j1';' pL1rs'L1a,:mi to £1116 jz1dgn1en£.'TV_ai;xd The petii:;i<3I1e.rs having; 23 Rule '3 and 121 CPC, /2007 si;at§r1g that the prayegfélgy. for Speczific perTf0rmar1§C£: of the judgment;

and 89 and therefore do r1<)vf;~. pi'<§ss against the defendants, and i:ha1:'I:A%.N0V.3-5 AV:-?£:§aLS5'~'.~i:}_Ot under the correct pr0v:is.i0n '~ Uf .1:§§;év* far §3e'z"1ni§5si--er5:«'t.@ withdraw U16 suit with Eibe1'i.y to _ i71'1<§ f=:'--£~:_$l1."'s;:i'i, smzgklt to withdraw that application 313 aaibi; pre$s€;éd, I.A.N0.36 W213 opposed by filing st,a1t;er1"1eni; of " .AA<:;=7*::_;fe{<'::'£;i<>:1se; of §"<;=:ssp::>r1d¢x:-3:m. E~E:§.5 i2:1t':er21lia (:{,3:':a€',<--3'I";C1i:":gj that 3 3&1 r :='~*1wnsm..9 _(_w,_ the relief" xasas one of misuse of process of law Eéz. pmc<;:dur£: zmd I:,he.1t. the pet:i.iii(>I1ers were céhe1.I1gir1g»~.::}:2Qir stance from timxs to time; i'.}.1E1{L izhe IS' def:§_n'daé2;'$;.. _ bang a party to the ag§ree:1n<~311t'. dig.» 16/.i'2;;" céaxtld 1'1_0t: be sued for specific pe1'£'c)rr:1:éz_11(:r;"as 21150'~ﬂ*1';1t." i:h..; '**::s_;:

and 2"" d<3fe:f1da'r1t.s were not 'pg;rt,ies*-{:0 the"ag;f¢enj3,Ve;11i: Qf» L sale; whﬂe deny.i11g 11,1163 V_...a1'3v€ga_1:i0:1 ' "¥;}12_1i: fthe 41'?' respondent. Coﬁuded i"'1':V ti-12:4'.1n1§aLtte'i*--:(3f &:.€:Curing.g the sale deeds on 4,/=T£_;"1. Q96.;"iﬁoigxgh{the '.5!-¥ '»'Ciefe11cia.r1t, is a benafide 1;-11fé*3_1é;.sv.6:;'i* ':i'<).j'__'_\%'-a_Izz£:" i2if01'11 the true owner, the 131 a'L"-icEii*io2i;""'i't,"is corztendeci that the dec1"<:~é__ in, Qbizaineci by playing fraud on the <::011rt wit.h<>L;'t' disclasizxg the two agreemerlts and the undertiakiriga ;t'1t:..aiw.j_'£:E*;:1rax$§r2ﬁ of the s»;uit:, since permission.

to .»«5wi1'.hd 'aw " suit and. fiie 3 fresh suit is °-i.n'1';;><3i":*iiLis3sib1r:7, t:.I'i'é%" Suit cieservéts to be dismissed. _ £~\...:V~.c'(3r(i'i~ng.,"EQV "the 51'" defendant, havizlg s£=:cur<:d the :r<:%gis§£:r2it1€§'}:'3 $2116 cieeds on 4/4/1998', the deed of 321%' €:=::r§.:::;';:<:':".é'*£':s-;;*:a:i an ?'/4;' 1§}E%'?, by the W {§€f(EY}{'§£<1i'1il tiarcmgzgll e::0u:*t:§ did net confer on the p1air1tiff any right, t.if.1e or izltierest in the suit sche<:i11.£e prcaperty. Zf_' x1-as furth::=,r c0ni:eI1dc:=:d that no grmmds are 11:1-¢iiEi"c2~..Vz_:;v~v..7,;_i:"::fgi'g_ permit the piazintifi" to W.1t;}:1draw tins'. s1.1it_--si::m.§%..1;}:é:rc azijé no f{>rm.21I defects in the fraine Q1' the.' é;u_£*:... ~A.I;21$i:1'y.,__jt."iA is c:0I1teI1ded that the p1e1;'f1i,!._f1's 1?1a\'}'1r1g ='::ii;2;:1.23,,g>;§*.<:'§ protract the littigation for 15 yé3ar_s~,.._»ctani1c1,_be 1jf€r'n1itt<3d to withciraw the suit 2i--s.71t:_ A\A!=_0u:]_. dV {:"a.'Lji;sAé'+greater hardship {O the defendants '_ ﬁinaitipiicity' of p1f0Ceedi11g.s,. - é 5;:

4. A'1_ih5%cgg»;;i%.in%efimu.r;;: of 0.8.192/98 by the 5m defenda ntLéarraigiiiiig pétit4i0'ners as defendants for a ci<3ci;ir'a*;:,io11 ti*;21_t i:he "decree in 0.8.514/'89 nail and vai.d, . 'n_<V)i'. fozﬁactomixzg, f1:*<>Iz'1 the pleadings, "né*ir(::'t:heT::.ss',~.1"iérzaaaled C0un$e': ﬁn' the parties Subrnit t-.E1:5i%;': ii: is per1ding.

A Sf The mart b<-slow ilaiifiiig regard '(:0 the pieadinga fiiisit p::1ri;i»::s3, by 'zhe: <>'r':i£--t:* i:I1}'>:,1§_§m;=,(i, §ii5;r1":is:3ss¢%d I.A.N€:>.35 based on the plaintiffs memo, whﬂc": partly z11_i0wi11g I.A.No.36, by dismissing tine suit as \a?it.I1Vd1r;;iv»;in. ES. 'The: (:ha11eI1ge in this petiitican .

imptlgrled is res'm(:{'.ed to iihe o;1T§i.€;:_1" on'"E]§A~.N(>.V3'8.".V in other Words, the dismissal of i';i1<-3 i SuiV'{'. as "£xrith{ij?22V&i31_,:

without liberty '£10 file 21 fr e_sf1._ suit:"~:--1gajz_1S{'v ré§Sp{:»n-'dentv No.5 for de(:L21r21t.ic:s11 of title tQ..T:h'€_S'il,i€[4 s<.:'ha*(iv1,;I(: §;)r0per£',y in View of the ;~eg:é<z.érea 5:;-,6; me. 7 /4 / 1998 executed by 13"" '{:0u1*t, pursuant to the j:_1d§;§§11'1%:ir1t5§a_.:*1';;1 1331' 1 4/ 89. [é1)&{b] of CPC provides that any time '{:V1"1€---:_ if;sb'tit.'{itAio:a of a suit, the plaintiff may ag:,i._ihs§;..L{>1' 23;i1§=v-.9§«:}1e dE:fe:1danf.s, either abandon the L' stiiitVQ_f=2§baI:§1t';n 21 part: of the claim and when the court is ._sé1t.isI'ié2dl_ that: a suit. must fa_i_1 by reasgora of Some f<>r':1'1al €Eefe€.:i; or 'c;hat thesre are ssufficierat. gmunds for " a.':1:)\';fx';i11g; the plaintiff to i:1stiE:ui*.<:,=, 21 fresh smt :f<:>:' the u sézbje3c:t.»»«mat;i,«:;:1* {sf 2: $1.11!. or pari wf a C§2"iif1'Z, ii; may, an 'wk _L;, Slich izexmis as it thinks iii; <3"ra3'1t the plaiiitiff permission to wiihciraw fmrai suit or such part of the C.1&1i£E1. T 2

8. An eX:a.mim1t:io1'1. of the ox:'de1f_j"'im.p~a:s._g:ied'«A (ii€5C10S€S tihat; iihe <?o11:rt beimw, in great:

out facts, noticeci the C()'i1d11C'{i the j?aei:ii;ic3.r1'e1"s3" net disclosing the niaferial pE1¥1:iC«I.;i1a1"S!! 'Of 'the j1idg;1vi1_ent_e§ andi» decree dt. 7/4/1997 in Eﬁﬁfiill the fact. that the plaint LA. 28, pe1*mj.t,t.§1'1g the .21§idiii:c>i*;zii. izheit the sale deedsi favour of the 5'=?* 1'esp0i'1de_r::i Concluded that filing of IA iirziew the 1iiii.gaf.i()I1, and as a eonseq11er1i;?.e pr_--1ri:£y 'a-.~.}I(',tWVecl the IA dismissing the suii as Wit..1*i:§1fair«;rr1 \2vi'i'.i"x-511;}__1'iAbert.y to file a fresh slgiiti against the :"_*:!.iAi' "1'e:s:pe;1d'e.11i'.. The court': below having Observed the iiawii the opinion repmted in 1980 (2) KLJ .ti§i?;%.11..i::21S AIR 1982 SC 789 in the matter of siif{ia?.ie--:1{*;y "iii ggreiiiiitis for with:ii'awa1 and ii'bei'f;.y {:2 file fresh ssuiti and ever the e:»<:ist.e:n.(:e of formai defect, n_eve':*t;heiess, did 3:101: as5s1'g1'1 I'(i€iSO3i1E-3 fer Ei:--:'~3 e1pp1ie.:a_bi}_it4y to the fraeiis of the case.

9. Sri Naganande learned Sr' Co;1_i1e§e1;._{.:'i:1_ his usz.za.'E form points out to the 'Ee1vv}1e1.id_AAc1:j3\m_": V.t1*1i;~;..;;:'(§i;1ft' in K. Y. SIDDARAJU vs. GEr§.ERAL"'MA;'vAG1a1z7-as:'()'rIri§5,1és1 Observing that, under OFC1€I"'v'v}2.j..3:V~;2i}3C has no power to dissect the i;1ter10eu.tc)ry application .21r1(§_ allow... Appiying the €)bS€l'V3i'i0IfE the order exfaeie is 11'z1é;;:2st,_afii;§£§1e._%ia1§ie.V»_fe4&_3E\Io'.86 is allowed in part, in so far as the suit withdrawn uritijggfeit i; .1ibeV1"€Ty-. fresh suit.

su§:>miss.ior1 of the learned Sr. Ceuzzasel i:h;a;._«:h'e« jjv}--a_1i£1.ffiVffS CL}T}d.LiCt disemiitles them to any relief in 39:1 pfeiteedilagg under Art.22'? of the C{)11&st.itution (If ., IA'm1--i._z}.. urmczeeptabie in the Eight: of ihe fact that the 18' 2 Mina 1':-:=<-23> x.ra§2::£_::§ {?<'"1 mequsww <ie'fencia1'1t.. t.I'1:3 vtsndor CGII}3"Z{'1()'1"3 to boih the petitiorxers 21116. the 5"? respc>r1_dem'., <;'.X€(31£f.€3d saale deeds-3 in fe;x?0_11T:fV0f both '£;he _part.i<~:s at ciiffereilf. p0i.11t.s of time (:Q:§h2*e3;*i1?:g;__'ti:¢" _ suit, schedule pr(>perty, the (221gse3 f0:*""i.}':gf§~.. .}i":Vi.;g'ga,A:fj.iz3V31 between the parties. Yet a§§a;i31! ...:}3'e {iei?:i'14f£ETI11fi« €*X€C11t.Efd the sake deedss o:"i:4~/V.1 1/"1~9€V3'6 vi11T"f'éi'§r§3L1rVVV0é3' 1:115:-

5%" respcmdent. C0:1ve§,«"ing 3 a_¢i"'e..s_ eimd 16--gur1t:a§t~; of land wit:h<)ui: discios-:«i1'1g 17ac?:'i.u:1i"'---- of"A conveyance, in

03.514»/89 dﬁ=;'mf_eed I A ""<:a'I':- 13,7 , fbiiotved by the exectmon _ 9?» 0:1 ' $1 1/ 1997 thmugh (:011rt.,~'"if1' e§§'~:C;1J.{'iQi§- pr£j(:t=:éVdi11_gs. Thcjrefore the d_i_spL1fr: betweV<?::'i:"'i'141'e._peiiiiioizers and the 5?" respondent con1mer.ie_ed%%noi:V.dt1e' Conduct. of the piaintiffs but CEue_t.Q '{4}1e4'"<i<?s2fLd:;1e§~1', 03:" W respondent. it may be that thggé'5§3e:t_if,iQr1ers§"ilavev pmionged the Eitigatiorz €V€3l"SiI1C€ i;.:f:€_V but that by it:s<:If and r10ti1ing more "w::21'f1I1 <A)i.=:~:.é3;i§i' that the petit1'{mcrs coufd be fast.e11ed with :1Cgiig¢:r'1£ée 01" i:'121c:t.ia:m.

-ti, /

1. i_. Wii.h(>ut dwsriiimg going ir1i:<:« the mr3,1'i.t ox? cie.r:1e1*it: 0f the claims of the partixas m be 21ddresse;'ciT._by Ehﬂf ccmrt. below, ézlrzis 'p£:t.iE:i011 is e1<::t(3:'di11g'i_:é '21§1§-3--v;*ctrsi_."' _ The order (it. 8/ 10/2010 in so f}:;rjme1$ it »ii'c;.:p'a_1*'i1§§§' d_is2111<3W'£:1g I.A'No.Z36 is quash'e__d the-,;5rr)Cée.di'I:g remit:t<-3d for comsici<3r21t.i0n

12. Keeping in 'mind pgﬁrtzies are Iit.igai.ing since': the ._¢c)11ri belew is ciir<:cted to (?OI3;(31L1Ci(3:.'€'i1'€:3..}?€€£Yiﬁg 6f :t'.':'i 1 s!3'ﬁapplicaiiorz, if the p21ri',ie.s_. u (§fE:iers more on as

-Wztllizl the outez' limit of 6 momhs"fr(:3}m. are represmltcd by counsel 21r1:;1_;j21I"eA .di3'eci<~:r_._i {Q be present bczforcz the C0'E3.i'1", below on . 7;';3;'?.Ol_1 ﬁavithevzzt; separate court xmtice.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court