IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT WRIT PETITION No.32662 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
SRI. VENKATAPPA S/O. LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS NO.790/40, 10TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS, BHUVANESHWARINAGAR 80 FEET MAIN ROAD BANASHANKARI III STAGE BENGALURU – 560 085. … PETITIONER (BY SRI V.B. SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
SRI SHIVARAM S/O. LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS NO.59, 6TH CROSS SAMPANGIRAMA NAGAR, BENGALURU AND ALSO AT NO.11, 3RD FLOOR, 10TH MAIN, BHUVANESHWARINAGAR KATTRIGUPPE, BANASHANKARI III STAGE, BENGALURU – 560 085. … RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD: 19.06.2018 ON I.A. FILED UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC BY THE RESPONDENT IN O.S.NO.3153/2016 AT ANNEXURE – A ON THE FILE OF THE CITY CIVIL JUDGE AND BENGALURU CITY (CCH 3) AND IMPOSE COSTS OF THE RESPONDENTS AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER In this writ petition, the challenge is laid to the order of the Court below whereby, two suits are clubbed for the purpose of trial & disposal. The learned counsel for the petitioner assails the same as being unjust, arbitrary & impermissible.
2. The Apex Court in the case of CHITIVALASA JUTE MILLS VS. JAYPEE REWA CEMENT, AIR 2004 SC 1687, has observed as under:
“The Code of Civil Procedure does nto specifically speak of consolidation of suits but the same can be done under the inherent powers of the court flowing from Section 151 of the C.P.C. Unless specifically prohibited, the civil court has inherent power to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the court. Consolidation of suits is ordered for meeting the ends of justice as it saves the parties from multiplicity of proceedings, delay and expenses. Complete or even substantial and sufficient similarity of the issues arising for decision in two suits enables the two suits being consolidated for trial and decision. The parties are relieved of the need of adducing the same or similar documentary and oral evidence twice over in two suits at two different trials. The evidence having been recorded, common arguments need be addressed followed by one common judgment. However, as the suits are two, the court may, based on the common judgment, draw two different decrees or one common decree or to be placed on the record of the two suits.”
3. The impugned order being a product for exercise of discretion in the wisdom of the Court below, this Court exercising supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India ordinarily does not undertake a deeper scrutiny vide Apex Court decision in the case of TRIMBAK GANGADHAR TELANG AND ANOTHER VS. RAMCHANDRA GANESH BHIDE AND OTHERS, AIR 1977 SC 1222.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed off in limine, without granting indulgence.
However, regard being had to the age and nature of the suits in question, a request is made to the learned trial judge to try & dispose off subject suits as expeditiously as possible.
Sd/- JUDGE KTY/Bsv