IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.50723 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
SMT. SAVITRAMMA, AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS, W/O LATE R.SHANKAR, R/A NO.29, 17TH CROSS, R.T. STREET, BALEPET, BENGALURU-560053 (BY SRI. RAJESWARA P.N., ADVOCATE) AND:
1 . SRI. S. PRAKASH S/O LATE R. SHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, PROPRIETOR OF DEFUNCT, M/S PRAKASH ENGINEERING & IRON FOUNDRY, R/A BHARATHI, GLOBAL EDUCATION SCHOOL, PANNATHUR VILLAGE, PANNATHUR, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU-560 103.
2 . SMT. S.RADHA, W/O ATHIKESHAVULU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.5, G B LANE, COTTONPET, BENGLAURU-560 053.
3 . SMT. JAYA BHARATHI, W/O SRI. P.RAVI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.195, 2ND CROSS ROAD, 4TH MAIN ROAD, MANJUNATHNAGAR, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560010.
... PETITIONER 4 . SMT. S.RANI, W/O D.VENAKTESH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/A NO.29, 17TH CROSS, R.T.STREET, BALEPET, BENGALURU-560 053.
5 . SRI. V.BABU, S/O LATE V.K.VARADAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO.1956/82, 8TH ‘E’ MAIN ROAD, 2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010.
... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24.10.2019 ON I.A.s IN O.S.NO.9445/2015 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE LXIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (DDH-65), BENGALURU (ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY; AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner being the 5th defendant in a specific performance suit in O.S.No.9445/2015 is invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court for assailing the order dated 24.10.2019, a copy whereof is at Annexure-A, whereby the learned LXIV Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru City, having rejected his application filed under Section 10 of CPC, 1908 has refused to stay the suit proceedings till after the appeal in R.F.A.No.429/2011 pending on the file of this Court is disposed off.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the petition papers, the impugned order cannot be faltered inasmuch as, going by the petitioner’s contention, the suit proceedings shall be subject to outcome of the appeal in RFA No.429/2011. Regardless of the quality of the reasoning employed by the learned trial Judge, this Court is of the considered opinion that the matter does not merit indulgence, especially when the orders of the kind are a product of exercise of discretion.
Writ Petition is disposed off accordingly, all other contentions of the parties having been kept open.
Sd/- JUDGE DS