IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO.26743/2013 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
1. SRI K.N.MANJUNATHA S/O K.T.NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS 2. VIJAYENDRAPPA S/O K.T.NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS 3. OMKESHAPPA S/O K.T.NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 4. K.T.NARAYANAPPA S/O KAGODU THIMMANAIKA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE RESIDING AT MALESHANKARA STATE FOREST VILLAGE HARANAHALLI HOBLI SHIMOGA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT – 577 201 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI M.C.JAYAKIRTHI, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI RAMAPPA S/O KAGODU THIMMANAIKA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 2. SMT. HUCCHAMMA D/O LATE THIMMANAIKA AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS RESIDING AT KALIPURA VILLAGE HOSANAGARA TALUK SHIVAMOGA DISTRICT – 577 201 3. SMT. NAGARATHNA W/O K.T.NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS THE RESPONDENTS 1 AND 3 ARE RESIDING AT MALESHANKARA STATE, FOREST VILLAGE HARANAHALLI HOBLI SHIMOGA TALUK AND DISTRICT – 577 201 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MANJULA R KAMDALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2(a),(b),(d) (e),(g) & R3 SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02.04.2013 PASSED ON BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SHIVAMOGA IN FDP 1/10 VIDE ANNEXURE-D.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral):
1. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and respondent No.1 (Plaintiff) rightly submit that the impugned order dated 02.04.2013 passed on IA No.III by the trial Court in FDP No.1/2010 may be set aside and the trial Court may be directed to dispose of the final decree proceeding in accordance with law and in the light of a decision of this Court in Sanga Reddy vs Smt.Basamma and Others [ILR 2004 KAR 3664].
2. On the facts of the case, I accept the joint submission made by the learned counsel and accordingly make the following order:
The impugned order dated 02.04.2013 passed by the trial Court on IA No.III is set aside. The matter is remitted to the trial Court for reconsideration in the light of the aforesaid decision of this Court.
As the suit is of the year 1991 and the final decree proceeding is of the year 2010, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the final decree proceeding as expeditiously as possible. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. In view of disposal of the writ petition, IA Nos.1, 2 & 3 of 2016 do not survive for consideration; they stand disposed of accordingly.
Petition disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE KSR