IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.77/2019 AND WRIT PETITION No.5219/2019 (GM – CPC) BETWEEN:
SRI SIDDAIAH.B S/O LATE BASAVAIAH AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS R/AT U86/A, 1ST MAIN ROAD NEW BINNY LAYOUT BANGALORE-560023. ... PETITIONER [BY SRI PRABHU.M., ADV.] AND:
1. SRI M.KRISHNA S/O MUNISWAMY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT No.2/1, “A” STREET 12TH CROSS, MAGADI ROAD BANGALORE-560023.
2. SRI S.CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LATE SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT No.17/11, 24TH CROSS ROAD BHUVANESHWARI NAGAR BANGALORE-560024. …RESPONDENTS THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 15.12.2018 PASSED BY THE XIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, CCH 28, BANGALORE IN O.S.NO.1777/2012, VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND ETC., THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The petitioner has assailed the order dated 15.12.2018 passed on I.A.Nos.19 and 20 in O.S.No.1777/2012 on the file of the XIV Additional City Civil Judge [CCH.No.28] at Bangalore ['Trial Court' for short].
2. The respondents have filed a suit in O.S.No.1777/2012 before the Trial Court against the petitioner for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 29.12.2010. In the said proceedings, the petitioner herein has filed applications [I.A Nos.19 & 20] to re-open the case, recalling the order dated 04.10.2018 and permit the defendants to lead defense evidence of the witnesses. The same having been rejected, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. The Trial Court has categorically recorded that the learned counsel for the defendant has filed I.A.Nos.17 and 18 for re-opening and re-calling the order dated 02.07.2018 which was allowed on payment of cost of Rs.1,000/- each. Despite the same, neither the evidence was let in nor the cost was paid by the defendant. Again the defendant has filed I.A.Nos.19 and 20 to re-open and re-call the order dated 04.10.2018. It is discernable that the suit is of the year 2012. The conduct of the petitioner indicates that the frivolous interim applications are filed with an oblique motive of protracting the proceedings.
4. No ground being made out by the petitioner to re-open and re-call the order dated 04.10.2018, the Trial Court is right in dismissing the said applications. No exception can be found with the order impugned.
Hence, the writ petitions stand dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE NC.