Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 2]

Karnataka High Court

K Venkataramaiah Setty vs B R Seetharamappa Setty on 13 September, 2013

Author: H.G.Ramesh

Bench: H.G.Ramesh

                         -1-
                                     WP.No.2770/2011



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

     DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013

                       BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH

       WRIT PETITION No.2770/2011 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

K. VENKATARAMAIAH SETTY
S/O. LATE KANDLA KRISHNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
R/AT NO.36/5
APPAJI RAO LANE, CHOWDESHWARI
TEMPLE STREET CROSS
BANGALORE - 560 002                        ...PETITIONER

(BY MS. RACHITHA K. HIREMATH FOR
    SRI MANMOHAN P.N., ADVOCATES)


AND:

1.     B.R. SEETHARAMAPPA SETTY
       S/O. B. RAMAPPA
       AGE: MAJOR, NO.9
       SBI HOUSING COLONY
       KANAKAPURA ROAD
       BANGALORE

2.     B.S. RAGHURAM
       S/O. SEETHARAMAPPA SETTY
       MAJOR, NO.9
       SBI HOUSING COLONY
       KANAKAPURA ROAD
       BANGALORE

3.     B.S. SRIDHAR
       S/O. LATE B.R. SHAMANNA
       MAJOR, NO.186, MYSORE BANK COLONY
       BANGALORE
                           -2-
                                    WP.No.2770/2011


4.    B.S. PURUSHOTTAM
      S/O. LATE B.R. SHAMANNA
      MAJOR, NO.186
      MYSORE BANK COLONY
      BANGALORE

5.    B.S. RAMAPRASAD
      S/O. LATE B.R. SHAMANNA
      NO.186, MYSORE BANK COLONY
      BANGALORE

6.    B.S. LAXMANAPRASAD
      S/O. LATE B.R. SHAMANNA
      NO.186, MYSORE BANK COLONY
      BANGALORE

7.    G. RAVI
      S/O. LATE B.R. GOPAL
      MAJOR, NO.254, 4TH MAIN
      K.G. NAGAR, BANGALORE

8.    G. MOHAN
      S/O. LATE B.R. GOPAL
      MAJOR, NO.254, 4TH MAIN
      K.G. NAGAR, BANGALORE

9.    G. GANESH
      S/O. LATE B.R. GOPAL
      MAJOR, NO.254, 4TH MAIN
      K.G. NAGAR, BANGALORE

10.   G. SHANKAR
      S/O. LATE B.R. GOPAL
      MAJOR, NO.254, 4TH MAIN
      K.G. NAGAR, BANGALORE

      B.R. NAGARAJAN
      SINCE DECEASED BY HIS L.Rs.

11.   SMT. B.N. MEERA
      W/O. LATE B.R. NAGARAJAN
      MAJOR,

12.   SMT. B.N. SANDHYA
      D/O. LATE B.R. NAGARAJAN
      MAJOR
                            -3-
                                          WP.No.2770/2011




13.   SMT. B.N. RAJESHWARI
      D/O. LATE B.R. NAGARAJAN
      MAJOR

14.   SMT. B.N. PADMAVATHI
      D/O. LATE B.R. NAGARAJAN
      MAJOR

15.   SRI B.N. SRINIVASA MURTHY
      S/O. LATE B.R. NAGARAJAN
      MAJOR

      RESPONDENTS NO.11 TO 15 ARE
      R/AT NO.593, 21ST MAIN
      4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
      BANGALORE                          ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI S.W. ARBATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R8;
    M/S. H.R.ANANTHA KRISHNA MURTHY &
    ASSOCIATES, ADVOCATES FOR R15;
    R1 TO R7 & R9 TO R14 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)

      WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 13.12.2010 PASSED ON I.A.NO.13 IN O.S.NO.663/1995
PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE XXXVII ADDL. CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE, BANGALORE CITY,
PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-E AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOWED
I.A.NO.13.

     WP COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                       ORDER

H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral):

This writ petition by plaintiff no.11 is directed against an interlocutory order dated 13.12.2010 passed by the trial court dismissing his application- -4- WP.No.2770/2011 I.A.No.13 filed under Order XVIII Rule 17 of the CPC in the suit in O.S.No.663/1995 to recall P.W.1 for cross- examination.

2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the impugned order.

3. The trial court has dismissed the aforesaid application inter alia on the ground that the petitioner who is a subsequent purchaser of the suit schedule property had not filed any separate pleadings on his impleadment in the suit as plaintiff No.11. A defendant, who has not filed his written statement in a suit, is entitled to cross-examine plaintiff's witnesses. Filing of pleading is not a condition precedent to cross- examine a witness. Hence, the reasoning of the trial court is erroneous. The matter requires to be reconsidered by the trial court in accordance with law. Accordingly, I make the following order:

The impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted to the trial court for reconsideration in -5- WP.No.2770/2011 accordance with law. All contentions of both the parties are kept open.
Petition disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE hkh.