IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MAY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR W.P.NO.20407/2017 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
SMT. RENUKA NARAYANASWAMY KRISHNAPPA W/O LATE K NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/AT NO.94, “VIKRAM’, 4TH MAIN, PRAMOND LAYOUT PANTHARAPALYA BENGALURU-560 039.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI. KALYAN R, ADVOCATE) AND:
K.K. DINESH S/O KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT KEKAD VILLAE BYLUKUPPE POST PREIYAPATNA TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT-570 001.
... RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.4.2017 ON I.A.NO.4 IN O.S.NO.18/2016 ON THE FILES OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., GOWRIBIDANUR VIDE ANNEXURE-M.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he may be granted liberty to file fresh interlocutory application before the trial Court under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for appropriate relief. His submission is placed on record.
Though present writ petition is dismissed, since the impugned order passed by the trial Court rejecting the application on the ground that prayer sought for in the present application cannot be granted, said order would not come in the way of petitioner filing a fresh application before trial Court. It is needless to state that if such application is filed, same would be considered by trial Court on merits and in accordance with law and necessarily after affording opportunity to other side. However, no opinion is expressed with regard to merits of the case. Subject to above observation, writ petition is hereby dismissed.
SD/- JUDGE DR