Karnataka High Court
Smt. Subhadra W/O. Matthew Lopiz vs Kiran S/O. Ramachandra Jadhav Urf ... on 31 May, 2023
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
WP No. 103040 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MAY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 103040 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SMT. SUBHADRA W/O. MATTHEW LOPIZ,
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER,
R/O. NO. 304, MAHAVEER COLONY, SAMRAT
APARTMENT, SHANTI NAGAR, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580 023.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI GIRISH A. YADAWAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. KIRAN
S/O. RAMACHANDRA JADHAV @ CHOKKANAVAR,
AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O. DURGAD ONI, UNKAL, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580 0031.
VIJAYALAKSHMI
M KANKUPPI
High Court of
Karnataka,
2. KUMARI. HARSHA
Dharwad
D/O. RAMACHANDRA J@ CHOKKANAVAR,
AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. DURGAD ONI, UNKAL, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580 0031.
3. KUMARI. LAKSHMI
D/O. RAMACHANDRA JADHAV @ CHOKKANAVAR,
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. DURGAD ONI, UNKAL, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580 0031.
4. KUMARI. POOJA
D/O. RAMADHANDRA JADHAV @ CHOKKANAVAR,
-2-
WP No. 103040 of 2023
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. DURGAD ONI, UNKAL, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580 0031.
5. RAMACHANDRA
S/O. HANAMANTAPPA JADHAV @ CHOKKANAVAR,
AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS/AGRICULTURE,
R/O. DURGAD ONI, UNKAL, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580 0031.
6. ANTHONY S/O. CHOURAPPA SAKRI,
AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS/AGRICULTURE,
R/O. MAHADEV COLONY, SHANTI NAGAR,
HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 023.
SMT. ANTHONAMMA W/O. CHOURAPPA SAKRI,
SINCE DECEASED, BY HER LRS.
7. DHARMU CHOURAPPA SAKRI,
AGE: NOT KNOWN, OCC: NOT KNOWN,
R/O. MAHADEV COLONY, SHANTI NAGAR,
HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 023.
8. SMT. SUNITA UJVALA W/O. CHOURAPPA SAKRI,
AGE: NOT KNOWN, OCC: NOT KNOWN,
R/O. MAHADEV COLONY, SHANTI NAGAR,
HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 023.
9. SMT. ANANDAMMA W/O. IMMANUEL HOMBAL,
AGE: 71 YEARS, OCC: RETRIRED TEACHER,
R/O. HOUSE NO.31,
RPHS COLONY, AMBIKA NAGAR,
HUBBALLI-580 023, DIST: DHARWAD.
10. SMT. B. MARY W/O. GOODWIN,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. RAMDEV APARTMENT, BEHIND
FATIMA SCHOOL, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580 023.
11. STEPHEN S/O. CHOURAPPA SAKRI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: NIL,
-3-
WP No. 103040 of 2023
R/O. SAMARTH APARTMENT,
SHANTI NAGAR, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580 023.
FRANKLIN S/O. CHOURAPPA SAKRI
DECEASED
12. FILOMINA W/O. FRANKLIN SAKRI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. C/O. ZNK APARTMENT, SULLA ROAD,
BWENGERI BADAVANE, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580 023.
13. IGLESIAS S/O. FRANKLIN SAKRI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. C/O. ZNK APARTMENT, SULLA ROAD,
BWENGERI BADAVANE, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580 023.
14. ANNAMMA D/O. FRANKLIN SAKRI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. C/O. ZNK APARTMENT, SULLA ROAD,
BWENGERI BADAVANE, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580 023.
15. KARNAL D/O. FRANKLIN SAKRI
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. C/O. ZNK APARTMENT, SULLA ROAD,
BWENGERI BADAVANE, HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580 023.
16. ISRAEL S/O. CHOURAPPA SAKRI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: NIL,
R/O. SULLA ROAD, MANOJ PARK,
HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 023.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI D.L. LADKHAN, ADV. FOR RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 4)
(NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NOS. 5 TO 16 ARE DISPENSED
WITH)
-4-
WP No. 103040 of 2023
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.04.2023 PASSED BY THE II
ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBBALLI, ON I.A. NO.
42 IN O.S.NO.341/2013 VIDE ANNEXURE-G.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard learned counsel Sri Girish A. Yadawad appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel Sri D. L. Ladkhan, appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioner, who was subsequently impleaded in the suit as defendant No.8 aggrieved by the order dated 19.04.2023 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi (for short, 'the Trial Court') on I.A.No.42 in O.S.No.341/2013, which application was filed under Order 18 Rule 17 of CPC to recall P.W.1 for further cross-examination.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that she was not provided an opportunity to cross-examine P.W.1, despite making an application, which is questioned herein on the ground that there is nothing different pleaded by him other than defendant -5- WP No. 103040 of 2023 Nos.2, 4 and 5 who are none other than the brothers and sisters. It is contention of learned counsel for petitioner that in the original suit initiated by respondents/plaintiffs, the petitioner was not a party and only the mother, brother and sisters were parties. After initiation of the suit petitioner's mother/defendant No.3 died, subsequently the petitioner is impleaded as defendant No.8, therefore, she could not cross-examine the plaintiff witness P.W.1. Hence, she made this application to recall P.W.1 to cross- examine, the plaintiff witness, which came to be dismissed by the Trial Court. It is submitted that petitioner/ defendant No.8 has filed separate written statement making various contentions since she is a party to the proceedings and she has been subsequently impleaded. Despite the present petitioner inheriting rights of the deceased mother, defendant No.3, she would still entitled to cross-examine P.W.1 to the limited extent of her defence pleaded in the written statement. It is made clear that since the petitioner/defendant No.8 steps into the shoes of original defendant No.3 the mother along with -6- WP No. 103040 of 2023 other legal heirs, the scope of cross-examination would be limited to the defence and plea taken by the petitioner herein. Hence, he seeks to allow this petition and set aside the order passed by the Trial Court and permit her to cross-examine P.W.1.
4. Per Contra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4/plaintiffs contends that the petitioner does not have any independent right, she is only exercising her rights as a legal heir of defendant No.3 i.e., mother, who died subsequent to initiation of suit. The other defendants already having cross-examined P.W.1 and nothing specifically pleaded contrary to the statements already made by other defendants, the Trial Court has not committed any illegality in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner as the same is filed only to drag on the proceedings. It is no doubt true that the petitioner/ defendant No.8 is made a party as a legal heir of defendant No.3. She has no independent right she has pleaded that she will not have any separate right for -7- WP No. 103040 of 2023 herself as she steps into the shoes of defendant No.3 along with other legal heirs.
5. It is contention of the petitioner/defendant No.8 that she has taken different plea other than the other defendants in his written statement which the Court can consider and accordingly permit the petitioner/defendant No.8 to cross-examine P.W.1 to that limited extent under the circumstances, I pass the following :
ORDER
(i) Writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The order dated 19.04.2023 vide Annexure-G in O.S.No.341/2013 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi dismissing the application of petitioner/defendant No.8 is set aside.
(iii) Petitioner/defendant No.8 is permitted to cross-examine P.W.1.
(iv) It is made clear that the trial Court is at liberty to curtail the petitioner/defendant No.8 from raising or questioning P.W.1 -8- WP No. 103040 of 2023 on the same questions already put forth by the other defendants.
(v) The trial Court shall permit the
petitioner/defendant No.8 to cross-
examine P.W.1 on other aspects which have not been dealt with while cross- examining the P.W.1.
(vi) Since the original suit is posted for argument on the main matter, I deem it appropriate to direct the trial Court to permit the petitioner/defendant No.8 to cross-examine P.W.1 on the date fixed by this Court.
(vii) The cross-examination shall be conducted by petitioner/defendant No.8 of P.W.1 on 19th and 20th day of June, 2023. it is also made clear that the trial Court is at liberty to curtail the defendants on unnecessary and irrelevant questions, if it deems so fit.
(viii) Since the suit is of the year 2013, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the main suit expeditiously within an outer -9- WP No. 103040 of 2023 limit of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
SD/-
JUDGE CKK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5