IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.40489 OF 2015 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
1. SRI. M.V.KESHAVA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, S/O. LATE M.VENKATAPPA, SRI. V.VISHWANATH, SINCE DECEASED BY LRS.
2. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, W/O. LATE V.VISHWANATH 3. SRI. SUMANTH, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, S/O. LATE V.VISHWANATH, P1 TO P3 ARE R/AT NO.2435, 10TH MAIN, ‘D’ BLOCK, 2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560010.
(BY SRI. K.K.VASANTH, ADVOCATE) AND:
SRI. G.V.VASANTHAPPA, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.
… PETITIONERS 1. SMT. B.N.SAROJA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, W/O. LATE G.V.VASANTHAPPA, R/AT NO.357, 5TH MAIN, 1ST BLOCK, SRINAGAR, BENGALURU-560050.
2. SMT. GAYATHRI, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, D/O. LATE M.VENKATAPPA, 3. SMT. SUSHEELAMMA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, D/O. LATE M.VENKATAPPA, 4. SRI. GIRISH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. LATE M.VENKATAPPA, THE R2 T R4 ARE R/AT 2435, 10TH MAIN, ‘D’ BLOCK, 2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560010.
SMT. SHARADAMMA, (DIED ON 9.11.2012) THE R2 TO R4 BEING HER LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES ARE ALREADY ON RECORD.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NISHANTH A.V., ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2, R3, R4, R5(A) SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN MISC. PETITION NO.66/2010, ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU & SET ASIDE THE ORDER 07.08.2015 PASSED IN MIS. PETITION.NO.66/2010 BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, VIDE ANNEX-J AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW MISC. PETITION NO.66/2010.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri. K.K.Vasanth, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Sri. Nishanth A.V, learned counsel for the respondents.
In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have assailed the validity of the order dated 07/08/2015 passed by the trail Court in Misc. Petition No.66/2010, by which the application seeking restoration of the suit has been dismissed.
2. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the writ petition be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to assail the validity of the order dated 04/12/2009, by which previous application filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.
3. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of liberty as prayed for.
Needless to state that all contentions to the parties which are available to them in law are to be raised, in case such a petition is filed.
Sd/- JUDGE Msu