IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.54196/2016 (GM – CPC) BETWEEN:
SRI KRISHNAPPA PURUSHA S/O LATE BADU PURUSHA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS R/AT NADASALE, PADUBIDRI KARKALA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-574111. ... PETITIONER [BY SRI V.R.PRASANNA, ADV.] AND:
1. SRI KRISHNAPPA JOGI S/O RADHU PURUSHATHI AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/AT RAM GALLI, SAI SALVI APARTMENT GROUND FLOOR, ROOM No.1 A, POORAN, RAIGHAD DISTRICT MAHARASHTRA-410201.
2. SRI RUKMAYA S/O GURUVA PURUSHA & RADHU PURUSHATHI AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT BATRATHOTA HOUSE AMMUNJE POST, AMMUNJE VILLAGE BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT-574219.
3. KRISHNA JOGI S/O GURUVA PURUSHA & RADHU PURUSHATHI AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT BANJANA PADAVU HOUSE AMMUNJE VILLAGE & POST D.K. DISTRICT-574219.
4. SMT.SUMATHI D/O GURUVA PURUSHA & RADHU PURUSHATHI AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT GUDDE HOUSE PEJAVARA VILLAGE & POST PORKODI, MANGALORE TALUK D.K. DISTRICT-574142.
5. VARIJA D/O GURUVA PURUSHA & RADHU PURUSHATHI AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT GURU KRIPA HOUSE BENJANA PADAVU POST AMMUNJE VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT-574219.
6. RAMA JOGI S/O GURUVA PURUSHA & RADHU PURUSHATHI AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT GURU KRIPA HOUSE BENJANA PADAVU POST AMMUNJE VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK D.K.DISTRICT-574219. …RESPONDENTS [BY SRI K.C.ARIGA, ADV. FOR R-2 TO R-6;
SRI RAJARAM SOORYAMBAIL, ADV. FOR R-2 TO R-6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 17.06.2016 ON I.A.3 IN O.S.No.48/2013 PASSED BY THE LEARNED ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE AT UDUPI, AT ANNEXURE-A IN SO FAR AS REFUSING TO FRAME PROPOSED ADDITIONAL ISSUES No.1, 3 AND 4 AS SOUGHT IN THE SAID APPLICATION AND ETC., THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R This writ petition is filed against the order dated 17.06.2016 on I.A.No.3 in O.S.No.48/2013 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge at Udupi ['Trial Court' for short].
2. It is discerned that the said O.S.No.48/2013 has been disposed of by the Trial Court and hence, writ petition does not survive for consideration.
In view of the aforesaid, writ petition stands dismissed as having rendered infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE NC.