IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO. 51738 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
1. SRI N S MANJUNATH S/O SWAMYGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 2. JANAMAKAMMA W/O R.RAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT CHOWDENAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, PERIYAPATNA TALUK – 571 186.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. A MADHUSUDHANA RAO, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SMT P V MEENAKSHI D/O LATE VEERANNA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT UPPARAGERI, PERIYAPATNA TALUK – 571 186.
2. SMT. MASTHAMMA W/O LATE VEERANNA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/AT UPPARAGERI, PERIYAPATNA TALUK – 571 186.
SRI. C CHANNAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LRS 3. SMT. HEMALATHA W/O LATE C.CHANNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 4. MS. KUSUMA D/O LATE C.CHANNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 5. MS. PUNITHA C/O LATE C.CHANNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 ARE R/AT CHOWDENAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, PERIYAPATNA TALUK – 571 186.
... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC PERIYAPATNA DATED 26.08.2019 ON I.A.NO.XV IN O.S.NO.259/2010, PRODUCED AT ANNX-M, ALLOW THIS W.P. WITH COSTS.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Petitioners being the Defendant Nos.3 & 4 in a partition suit in O.S.No.259/2010 are invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court for assailing the order dated 26.08.2019, a copy whereof is at Annexure-M, whereby the learned single Judge, Periyapatna having rejected their application in I.A.No.15 has denied leave to file additional Written Statement, after condoning delay.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and having perused the petition papers, this Court declines to grant indulgence in the matter agreeing with the reasoning of the Court below that the petitioners earlier efforts in the same line proved abortive and therefore the order earlier made now comes in their way.
In the above circumstances, writ petition being devoid of merits is rejected in limine.
However, this order shall not come in the way of petitioner pressing into service the additional documentary evidence, in support of their claim that they are the absolute owners of the subject property, in accordance with law.
Sd/- JUDGE Snb/