Sri. S. Govindaraj vs Smt. Uthrakumari on 28 August, 2017

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri. S. Govindaraj vs Smt. Uthrakumari on 28 August, 2017

Bench: A.S. Bopanna

                          1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2017

                      BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA

         WRIT PETITION NO.52270/2016 (GM-FC)

BETWEEN:

1.     SRI.S.GOVINDARAJ
       S/O LATE SHANMUGHAM SUNDRAM
       AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

2.     SMT.JAYALAKSHMI
       W/O S.GOVINDARAJ
       AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

       BOTH ARE R/A NO.20
       'B' CROSS, GIDDAMMA LAYOUT
       AKASHNAGAR
       A.NARAYANAPURA
       BANGALORE - 560 016           ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI.M.R.NARAYANA RAO, ADV. FOR
    SRI.P.N.RAJESWARA, ADV.)

AND:

1.     SMT.UTHRAKUMARI
       AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
       W/O LATE SATYABALAN

2.     SRI.S.NITYANANADAM
       AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
       S/O LATE SATYABALAN

3.     SMT.NAGARANI
       AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
       W/O S.NITYANANDAM
                            2



4.   SRI.ASHOK KUMAR
     AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
     S/O LATE SATYABALAN

5.   SMT.CHITRA
     AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
     W/O VINAYAGAM

6.   SRI.VINAYAGAM
     AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
     FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN
     TO THE PETITIONERS

7.   SMT.PUSHPAVATHI
     AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
     W/O PANDIAN

     ALL ARE R/A NO.352
     NITYANANDAM NILAYAM
     1ST MAIN ROAD, UDAYANAGAR
     OPP:TO R.R.BAKERY
     BEHIND TIN FACTORY
     BANGALORE - 560 016               ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.M.VINAYA KEERTHY, ADV. FOR R1 TO R7)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED 22.09.2016 ON I.A.2 IN MIS.P.123/2016
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE III ADDL. PRL.JUDGE, FAMILY
COURT, BANGALORE AT ANNEXURE - A IN SO FAR AS NOT
GRANTING THE INTERIM ORDER AS PRAYED FOR IN I.A.2
AND ETC.

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

                       ORDER

The petitioners are before this Court assailing the order dated 22.09.2016 on I.A.No.2 in Miscellaneous 3 Petition No.123/2016. The petitioner herein is the petitioner in G & W.C.No.313/2015. The said proceedings was dismissed for default as according to the Court below, the petitioner was not diligent in prosecuting the petition. It is in that view, the petitioner had filed Miscellaneous Petition No.123/2016 under Order IX, Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking restoration of G & W.C.No.313/2015. In the said proceedings, the petitioner had filed I.A.No.2 seeking grant of interim order. Since, no interim order was granted, the petitioners are before this Court.

2. This Court, at the first instance, while directing notice to the respondents on 29.09.2016 had taken note that the proceedings in G & W.C.No.313/2015 being dismissed for default, the benefit of the interim order is to be granted. If that be the position, at this juncture, all that is necessary to be observed is that the interim order granted herein shall enure to the benefit of the petitioners, till the 4 Miscellaneous Petition No.123/2016 is disposed of on its merits. Hence, it is ordered accordingly.

3. The petitioners shall however take all diligent steps for securing disposal of Miscellaneous Petition No.123/2016 in an expeditious manner. The Court below, in that regard shall consider the petition as expeditiously as possible but, not later than four months from the date on which a copy of this order is furnished to the Court below.

The petition is accordingly disposed of. In view of disposal of the petition, I.A.No.1/2017 is also disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE ST

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court