Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Smt H V Godha Krishna vs Smt Shruthi D/O Sri B L

High Court Of Karnataka|29 June, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA SWAMY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.139 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
SMT. H.V. GODHA KRISHNA PRASAD W/O SRI. M.V. KRISHNA PRASAD AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT NO.116/5-1 11TH CROSS, MALLESWARAM BENGALURU – 560 003 (BY SRI. C.R. GOPALASWAMY, ADV.,) AND:
SMT. SHRUTHI D/O SRI. B.L. RAMESH BABU AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/AT NO.116/2-1 3RD FLOOR, ABOVE UNION BANK OF INDIA, 11TH CROSS MALLESWARAM BENGALURU – 560 003 ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF THE CPC 1908, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.01.2017 PASSED ON IA NO.2 IN OS.NO.6057/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE, DISMISSING IA NO.2 FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(a) AND (d) OF CPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Respondent has filed a suit for injunction against the defendant. During the pendency of the suit, he has filed application under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) of CPC for rejection of plaint. The said application came to be rejected. Against the said order, petitioner has filed this petition.
2. Learned counsel submits that the plaintiff tresspassed into the property of the defendant who is the owner of the property and she was put in possession by one unknown person. She was running a Paying Guest Accommodation which was closed in view of the notice issued by the BBMP. These are the grounds taken for purpose of rejecting the plaint the learned Judge not exercised the jurisdiction available.
3. Heard the petitioner and gone through the reasons assigned by the Court below.
4. The Plaintiff is in possession and it is not the disputed fact. Merely, plaintiff is prevented from running the Paying Guest Accommodation cannot be a ground reject the plaint. Suit filed by the respondent is to be adjudicated.
Hence, I find no ground to interfere with the order passed by the Trial Court. Accordingly, petition is disposed of with a direction to the Trial Court to dispose of the matter in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible but not later than one year.
Sd/-
JUDGE GH
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

Smt H V Godha Krishna vs Smt Shruthi D/O Sri B L

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
29 June, 2017
Judges
  • L Narayana Swamy Civil