Karnataka High Court
Smt.Saritha Agarwal vs M.R.Ramakrishnappa (Since Deceased) on 5 August, 2014
Author: Anand Byrareddy
Bench: Anand Byrareddy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.37293 OF 2013
AND
WRIT PETITION NO.8584 OF 2014 (GM-CPC)
Between:
Smt.Saritha Agarwal,
W/o Uttam Agarwal,
Aged about 39 years,
No.22, 4th Cross, 7th Main,
Srirampuram, Bangalore-21,
Presently residng at
Nos.36 & 38,
(New No.29),
3rd 'B' Cross,
Lal Bhahadur Nagar,
Bangalore - 560 043. ...Petitioner
(By Sri: A S Gupta, Advocate)
And:
M.R.Ramakrishnappa,
(since deceased)
2
S/o late Muniramaiah,
Represented by legal representative,
Sri R Prakash,
Aged 40 years,
S/o late M R Ramakrishnappa,
Residing at Andarhalli Village,
Chikkabalapura Taluk,
Kolar District - 563 101. ...Respondent
These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of
the Constitution of India praying to quash the orders passed by the
learned XLIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, holding
concurrent charge of Second Additional City Civil and Session
Judge, Bangalore, in O.S.No.1257/2006 dated 19.4.2013 vide
Annexure-B.
These writ petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing this
day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
The present petitions coming on for preliminary hearing, it is found on the face of it that the present petitioner was said to be the defendant in a suit which was dismissed for default. It transpires 3 that the plaintiff-Ramakrishnappa had died on 30.7.2011. The legal representatives of Ramakrishnappa were not brought on record. However, on the basis of the application seeking restoration of the suit, the same had been allowed by an order dated 19.4.2013. It is this which is the grievance of the petitioner.
2. The petitioner further contends that the suit stands abated and cannot be treated as restored to file in the eye of law, when the plaintiff was dead, unless his legal representatives are brought on record. If this is the glaring circumstance under which the suit has been restored, it is a fit case where the Trial Court would have to re-consider the application filed and direct the counsel for the plaintiff or such person representing the plaintiff to take appropriate steps to bring the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff on record, without which the suit cannot be restored to file. With that observation, the petitions are allowed, even without notice to the respondent. The Trial Court is directed to re-consider the 4 circumstances, if the contentions of the petitioner are found to be accurate. With that, the petitions stand disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE KM