IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.49720 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
Sri. Lingaraju, S/o late K. L. Ambanna, Aged about 56 years, R/o Arasinga Street, Near Mutton Market, Old Market, Chickpet, Tumkur-572 101.
(By Ms. Smitha Prakash, Advocate For Sri. Prakash G.R., Advocate) AND:
1. Sri. Palachandra, S/o late K. Ambanna, Aged about 60 years, R/o Devanahally, Garden Land, Devanahally Village-572 107, Bellavi Hobli, Tumkur Taluk.
2. Harish R. Sindhe, S/o late Nayaran Menon, Aged about 56 years, 3. Sri. Hachu Kuttan, S/o late Nayaran Menon, Aged about 56 years, … Petitioner 4. Smt. Rathnamurthy, W/o Sri. Krishnamurthy, Aged about 56 years, Respondent Nos.2 to 4 are residents of Devanahally Village-572 107, Bellavai Hobli, Tumkur Taluk.
5. Sri. P. Vijayakumar, S/o late Puttanarasaiah, Aged about 51 years, R/o near by house of owner of the Swasthik Bus, I Cross Upparahally Gate, Tumkur-572 102.
6. Sri. T. G. Hanumantha Rao, S/o Sri. P. L. Govinda Rao, Aged about 74 years, R/o Sangeetha Nilaya, Kuvempunagara, Tumkur-572 103.
Now residing at behind Parshanth Theatre, Annapurneswari Wine Shop, Tumkur-572 102.
7. Sri. Surya @ Surya Prasad S/o Nanjappa, Aged about 55 years, R/o No.1228, I Main Road, 3rd Cross, Yeshwanthapur, Bengaluru-560 022.
… Respondents This Writ Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the order dated 28.09.2018 passed on the I.A. filed by the petitioner in O.S.No.140/2012 pending on the file of III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tumkur (Annexure-C) and etc.
This Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Ms. Smitha Prakash, learned counsel for Sri. Prakash G.R., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Taking into account the order, which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondents.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission.
3. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 28.09.2018 passed by the Trial Court, by which application for permission to file written statement has been rejected on the ground that no document in support of illness of the petitioner was filed.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner be granted liberty to file fresh application duly supported by documents relating to illness and trial Court be directed to consider the application afresh in accordance with law.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an application seeking permission to file written statement afresh duly supported with the documents. Needless to say that, if such an application is filed, the trial Court shall consider the same afresh by a speaking order and in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to both the parties without considering the order dated 28.09.2018.
Sd/- JUDGE Mds/-