Petitioner seeking writ to quash a cryptic order rejecting a Section 10 CPC application. Court allowed the petition based on respondent's consent and directed trial court to pass a speaking order.
Writ pet allowed; impugned order set aside; trial court directed to reconsider I.A. No. 14 filed by defendant No. 4 under Section 10 CPC and pass a speaking order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY
WRIT PETITION NO.3203 OF 2020 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
K.LAXMANA SHETTY, S/O KUMARA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/AT K.M. ROAD, MUDIGERE TOWN AND POST, MUDIGERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577132.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VASANTHAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT. PADMAMMA AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS [ABATED] W/O KUMAR SHETTY
2
NO.1 TO 5 R/AT K.M.ROAD, MUDIGERE TOWN AND POST, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577132.
3
W/O LATE CHANDRAMMA RAMACHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT 6TH CROSS, PRAKASHNAGAR, BENGALURU-560021.
4
RESIDING AT VIJAYAPURA EXTENSION, CHIKKAMAGALURU CITY -577132.
BOTH ARE R/AT SWATHI TOWERS, K.M.ROAD, MUDIGERE TOWN AND POST, MUDIGERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU -577132.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M.KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;
VIDE ORDER DATED 10.02.2020 NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NOS.3 TO 17 IS DISPENSED WITH; RESPONDENT NO.2 IS SERVED)
5
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER IN O.S.NO.12/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., MUDIGERE DATED 03.02.2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND TO GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN O.S.NO.12/2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., MUDIGERE TILL PENDING DISPOSAL OF THE ABOVE WRIT PETITION.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
This Writ Petition arises out of an Order dated 03.02.2020 passed by the Trial Court in O.S. No.12/2017 by which I.A. No.14 filed by the defendant No.4 under Section 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, was rejected by the Trial Court by a cryptic order.
6
“The Respondent No.1 above named craves leave of this Hon’ble Court to submit that he is the contesting party both in the suit and also in the above writ petition. Other respondents are only formal parties and notices to un-served respondents may be dispensed with. After going through the contents of the writ petition, the respondent No.1 submits that the above writ petition is liable to be allowed on technical ground of impugned order being not a speaking order. In the circumstances, the Respondent-1 submits that he has no objection for allowing the above writ petition and remanding the matter to the trial Court for considering and disposal of the Petitioner’s I.A.No.14 for stay afresh within a period of two weeks as the suit is pending since 2013. ”
objection to allow the writ petition and remand the case
7
back to the Trial Court for reconsideration of I.A. No.14
filed by defendant No.4 – appellant herein under Section 10 of the Civil Procedure Code in O.S. No.12/2017.
Sd/JUDGE
sma
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court order rejecting the interim application simpliciter is liable to be quashed for lack of speaking order.
K.Laxmana Shetty
Sri S.Sachin
Smt. Padmamma
Sri. K. Sheshappashetty
Misc. Niloufer Sindhu
Smt. Nalini
Nataraj Rangaswamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
