Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri Kantharaju @ H J Kantharaju vs R Sharada And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|25 October, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO. 50153 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
SRI KANTHARAJU @ H J KANTHARAJU S/O JOGAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDING AT C/O M NAGARAJ NO 69, MANJUNATHA NILAYA, GARUDACHAR PALYA BENGALURU - 560048 (BY SRI. BHADRINATH R, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. R SHARADA, D/O LATE K T RAMAIAH SETTY AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 68, SUDARSHINI YELLAMMA TEMPLE STREET VIJINAPURA BENGALURU - 560016 SRI K T VENKATARAMA SETTY SINCE DECEASED BY LRS SRI JAYARAM SETTY SINCE DECEASED BY LRS 2. SMT PADMAVATHI W/O LATE V JAYARAMA SETTY AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS 3. SMT VANI W/O KRISHNAMURTHY D/O LATE V JAYARAMA SETTY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 4. SMT VEENA W/O RAVISHANKAR ... PETITIONER D/O LATE V JAYARAMA SETTY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 5. SRI J HARISH KUMAR S/O LATE V JAYARAMA SETTY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 6. SRI RAVI @ THIMMAIAH SETTY S/O LATE V JAYARAMA SETTY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 7. SMT VAHINI J W/O RAMESH D/O LATE V JAYARAMA SETTY AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO. 2 TO 7 ARE RESIDIGN AT NO 12, VASAVI MAHAL ROAD, OLD POLICE STATION, K R PURAM, BENGALURU - 560036 8. SMT NAGARATHNAMMA D/O LATE V JAYARAMA SETTY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 9. SRI SAMPANGIRAMA SETTY S/O K T RAMAIAH SETTY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS K T RAMAKRISHNAIAH SETTY SINCE DECEASED BY LRS 10. SRI R VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O LATE K T RAMAKRISHNAIAH SETTY RESPONDENTS NO. 8 TO 10 ARE RESIDING AT KOTE VENKATARAMANA SWAMY TEMPLE STREET K R PURAM BENGALURU – 560036 N VISWANATHA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS SRI N SRINIVASA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS 11. SMT VENKATARATHNAMMA W/O LATE SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS 12. SRI BHASKAR S/O LATE SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 13. SRI KIRAN S/O LATE SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 14. SMT N MANJULA D/O LATE NARAYANA SETTY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 15. SMT N SUSHEELA D/O LATE N NARAYANA SETTY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO.11 TO 15 ARE RESIDING AT NO 9, OLD MADRAS ROAD, K R PURAM, BENGALURU - 560036 16. SMT PADMAMMA W/O LATE R SUBBAIAH SETTY AGED ABOUT 56 YEASR 17. SMT HEMALATHA D/O LATE R SUBBAIAH SETTY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 18. SMT KALPANA D/O LATE R SUBBAIAH SETTY AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS 19. SMT LAVANYA D/O LATE R SUBBAIAH SETTY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 20. STM LAKSHMI RAMAIAH SETTY S/O LATE R SUBBAIAH SETTY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO. 16 TO 20 ARE RESIDING AT NO.189, NEAR KRISHNA THEATRE, BASAVANAPURA MAIN ROAD, K R PURAM, BENGALURU – 560 036.
21. SMT SARASAMMA W/O LATE R JAGANNATHA SETTY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 22. SMT MAMTHA D/O LATE R JAGANNATHA SETTY AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 23. SMT MANJULA D/O LATE R JAGANNATHA SETTY AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO. 21 TO 23 ARE RESIDING AT NO 476, KUMBAR STREET K R PURAM, BENGALURU – 560036.
24. SRI VENKARAMANA S/O MUNISWAMY SETTY RESIDING AT THIMMAIAH SETTY LAYOUT DEVASANDRA K R PURAM POST, BENGALURU - 560016 25. SRI DHASHARATHA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS S/O MUNISWAMY SETTY RESIDING AT KAPALLI PUNGANURE TALUK - 517247 CHITTOR DISTRICT A P SMT GURAMMA D/O LATE THIMMAIAH SETTY SINCE DECEASED BY LRS 26. SMT RATHNAMMA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS W/O NARAYANA SETTY D/O LATE GURAMMA SETTY GOWDANAHALLI VAKKALAGERI - 582103 KOLAR DISTRICT 27. SRI NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS S/O LATE MUNIKALAPPA RESIDING AT NO 8 26TH MAIN,17TH CROSS 6TH PHASE, J P NAGAR BENGALURU - 560078 28. SMT SUNANDAMMA AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS W/O ANANDA SETTY D/O GURAMMA RESIDING AT KONAPPANA, AGRAHARA , ELECTRONIC CITY POST, BENGALURU – 560100.
29. SRI SAMPATH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O LATE GURAMMA , RESIDING AT KONAPPANA , AGRAHARA, ELECTRONIC CITY POST, BENGALURU - 560100 30. SMT GOWRAMMA W/O A R NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS, RESIDING AT KOTTAPETE KUPPAM - 571425 CHITTOR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH.
31. SMT SARASAMMA D/O LATE K T RAMAIAH SETTY, W/O DR V NARAYANAIAH, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 54 11TH MAIN, VRUSHABHAVATHI NAGAR, MARUTHI NAGAR, KAMAKSHIPALYA, BENGALURU – 560028.
32. SRI R VENKATESHA MURTHY, S/O LATE K T RAMAIAH SETTY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT NEAR SAIBABA TEMPLE, T NAGAR BENGALURU – 560024.
... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.10.2019 ON I.A.NO.14 U/S 151 OF CPC IN O.S.NO.7726 OF 2004 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE AT BENGALURU (CCH-44) AS FOUND AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINMARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Petitioner being the 19th defendant in a partition suit in O.S.No.7726/2004 is invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court for assailing the order dated 22.10.2019 and another order dated 21.09.2019, the copies whereof are at Annexure-A, whereby the petitioner is not permitted to file the Written Statement.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the petition papers, this Court declines to grant indulgence in the matter inasmuch as the suit is of the year 2004 and Written Statement is sought to be filed with a delay of more than eleven years; the explanation offered for the delay does not appear to be plausible; the learned trial Judge having looked into all aspects of the matter, has made the impugned order which cannot be faltered.
3. Reliance of the petitioner on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of SANDEEP THAPAR vs. SME TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED, (2014) 2 SCC 302 and another decision dated 28.08.2017 in the case of KEMPANNA vs. HANUMANTHARAYAPPA in W.P.No.31384/2017 (GM-CPC) does not come to his aid inasmuch as the fact matrix in those decisions is bit different; this apart, they are fact specific and therefore are not invokable as precedents in matters of this nature.
4. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that to compensate heavy cost may be imposed in favour of the other side and thereby the Written Statement be permitted to be placed on record, does not merit acceptance, regard being had to inordinate delay brooked in filing the same, even if it is assumed that delay is only of four years, since it militates against the bar enacted in the provisio to Rule 17 of CPC, 1908.
The writ petition is rejected in limine.
Sd/- JUDGE Snb/
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

Sri Kantharaju @ H J Kantharaju vs R Sharada And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
25 October, 2019
Judges
  • Krishna S Dixit