Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Amruthesh N P And Others vs Sri Basavalinga Swami @ Basavaraju And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|14 January, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.8365 OF 2015 (GM-CPC) Between:
1. Amruthesh.N.P, Advocate & Notary, S/o. Late Putta Swami, Age 54 years, Residing at No.28, (Old No.107), 10th Main Road, J.C.Nagar, Kurubarahalli, Behind Dr.Ambedkar B.Ed., College, Bengaluru-86.
2. Somashekar.J.S, Retired District & Session Judge, S/o.N.C.Siddamallaiah, Age 61 years, R/o. Karnataka Judicial Quarter, Jakkuru, Bengaluru.
3. Parashivamurthy.B, S/o. Late Veeranna, Age 52 years, Residing at No.164, Gourishankara Nagar, Nanjangudu Road, Mysuru-9.
4. Mudnakodu Shivaraj, S/o. Nanjappa, Age: 42 years, Occ: Editor of Prajaprabuthva Weekly Newspaper, Residing at No.1274, 6th Cross, Janatha Nagar, Mysuru-9.
5. Vijaya Kumar.V, S/o. Late Virupakshappa, Age 39 years, Residing at No.4800, Basaveshwara Road, Rajendra Nagar, Mysuru-07.
6. Channaveeraradhya, S/o. Late. Channaveeraradhya, Age 45 years, Residing at No.1086, 1st Main, 2nd Cross, Vidyaranyapura, Mysuru-9.
(By Sri.Rajendra.S, Advocate for Sri.S.V.Prakash, Advocate) And:
1. Sri.Basavalinga Swami @ Basavaraju, Self Proclaimed Pontiff of Aramane Panchagavi Mut, S/o. Shivashankarappa, Residing at Chamundi Betta Thappalu, Nanjanagudu Road, Mysuru and also R/o. Ukkalagere, Soshale Hobli, T.Narasipura Taluk, Mysuru District-9.
… Petitioners 2. Sri.Shantha Veerendra Swamiji @ Sadashiva Swamiji, S/o. Late Puttabuddi Devaru, Aramane Panchagavi who has Renounced the Pontiff ship of Aramane Panchagavi Mut, Residing at No.424/B, 22nd Main, 2nd Stage, J.P.Nagar, Mysuru-08 and also Residing at No.670, 9th Main, Srirampura, 2nd Stage, Mysuru and also Residing at Yanagalli, Haradanahalli Hobli, Chamarajanagar Taluk & District-570 001.
3. Smt. Rathnamma, W/o. Shantha Veerendra Swami, Corporator of Mysuru City, Municipal Corporation from, Ward No.5, Residing at No.424/B, 22nd Main, 2nd Stage, J.P.Nagar, Mysuru-08 and also Residing at No.670, 9th Main, Srirampura, 2nd Stage, Mysuru-570 001.
4. B.Ganesh @ Rowdi Ganesh, S/o. Balasubramanya, Major in age, Residing at No.1143/87, 4th Main, 1st Cross, SGH Road, Vidyaranyapuram, Mysuru-590 002.
(Convicted prisoner Under going imprisonment at Central Jail, Hindalaga, Belgavi) – 590 002.
… Respondents (By Sri.M.B.Chandrachooda, Advocate for R1; Sri.Bhanuprakash.H.V, Advocate for R2 & R3 (Absent); R4-Served) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 17.10.2014 passed by the Court of Principal District Judge, Mysuru on I.A.No.5 in Misc.No.25/2014 vide Annexure-E and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ Group this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused the records.
2. In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have assailed the validity of order dated 17.10.2014 insofar as it pertains to rejection of the application under Order XXVI Rule 9 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’ for short).
3. On perusal of the records, it appears that the petitioners had filed the application under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code even before the registration of the suit. The trial Court by the impugned order has rejected the aforesaid application on the ground that the suit was yet to be registered and enquiry on the application filed under Section 92 of the Code had not commenced. Therefore, it was too early to claim issuance of commission for spot inspection. The writ petition is pending before this Court since 2015. By now the civil suit by the petitioners must have been registered. Therefore, it is not necessary for this Court to examine or ascertain the validity of the order impugned in this petition.
4. It is needless to state that the petitioners shall be at liberty to file an application under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code at appropriate stage of the suit.
With the aforesaid liberty, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Amruthesh N P And Others vs Sri Basavalinga Swami @ Basavaraju And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
14 January, 2019
Judges
  • Alok Aradhe