IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO.41739/2017 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
SRI ACHANKUNJU S/O KUNJACHAN AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT SHAN VIEW HOUSE LAILA VILLAGE & POST BELTHANGADI TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT – 574 214 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI SRINIVASA D.C., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI THOMAS JOSEPH S/O JOSEPH ADVOCATE, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDING AT MANNUR HOUSE CHEMPATHOTTY VILLAGE AND POST TALIPARAMBA TALUK KANNUR DISTRICT KERALA STATE – 670 631 2. SRI MUHAMMED KUNJI S/O ABDUL KHADER AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS RESIDING AT THASSIFA COTTAGE CHERUR POST KASARGOD DISTRICT KERALA STATE – 671 123 3. SRI P.M.SEBASTIAN S/O MANI THOMAS AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDING AT POOVAKOTTU HOUSE KUNJARATHANAM POST OFFICE KURUPANTHARA VAIKKOM TALUK KOTTAYAM DISTRICT KERALA STATE – 686 603 4. SRI SANDEEP JAYANTH SUKHTANKAR S/O JAYANTH NARAYAN SUKHTANKAR AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESIDING AT # 1301, HURRAH, CITY OF JOY JSD ROAD, MULAD (WEST), MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA STATE – 400 081 5. SRI P.B.ABDUL RAZAK S/O BEERAN MOIDEEN HAJI AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS MLA, MANJESHWARA CONSTITUENCY RESIDING AT S.S.MANZIL, TAJ NAGAR ALAMPADY POST OFFICE KASARGOD TALUK & DISTRICT KERALA STATE – 671 123 ... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED IN O.S.NO.122/2011 DATED 10.08.2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHIKKAMAGALURU, DIRECTING THE COURT COMMISSIONER TO SUBMIT REPORT ON THE DISPUTED SIGNATURES OF THE PETITIONER ON EX.D-1 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AS ILLEGAL AND VOID AND FURTHER DISMISS I.A.NO.26 FILED BY R-1 AS NOT MAINTAINABLE.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral):
1. This writ petition is by the plaintiff and is directed against an interlocutory order dated 10.08.2017 passed by the trial court allowing the application-I.A.No.26 filed by defendant no.1 (respondent no.1 herein) under Order 26 Rule 10(a) of CPC in the suit in O.S.No.122/2011.
2. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the impugned order.
3. By the impugned order, the trial court has directed the Court Commissioner to compare the signature of the plaintiff in Ex.D1 with the signatures in Exs.D1(a), D1(b), D1(c) & D1(d) and to submit his report in the matter.
4. I find no ground to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE hkh.