This writ appeal sought to modify observations in the Single Judge's order that appeared to prejudge merits of a pending civil suit. The High Court clarified that the Single Judge expressed no opinion on merits and disposed of the appeal to protect future judicial proceedings.
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 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA
AND
THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G.UMA
WRIT APPEAL No.22/2021 (KLR)
BETWEEN:
… APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI.N.K.RAMESH, ADVOCATE)
2
AND:
… RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI.C.N.MAHADESHWARAN, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; R4 AND R5 NOTICE DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 08.02.2021)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO 1. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09.03.2020 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P. NO. 5461/2020 (KLR), IN CONFIRMING THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN REVISION PETITION NO.67/2019 DATED 20.02.2020 AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA, J. , DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -
3
JUDGMENT
Though the appeal is listed for Preliminary Hearing, with the consent of learned counsel for the appellants and learned AGA, it is heard finally.
The above observation indicates that the learned Single
Judge has opined that the exercise of powers under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, vis-à-vis
the latest sale deed dated 22.01.1996 is just and proper,
4
which may have a bearing on O.S.No.666/2019 pending on the file of IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, which has been filed by the appellant herein.
5
“11. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case advanced by both the parties. It is open for the aggrieved party to establish their right before the competent forum, if so advised.”
Therefore, in fact, the learned Single Judge has not given any finding nor made any observation on the merits of the matter.
6
of the learned Single judge do not have any bearing on the merits of the case of the respective parties in O.S.No.666/2019 pending on the file of the IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, which has to
be decided on the pleadings and evidence on record. The learned Trial Court shall not be influenced by the aforesaid observations of the learned Single Judge and shall decide the matter strictly on the merits of the case.
The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
No costs.
In view of the disposal of the appeal I.A.No.2/2021 is disposed.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
Psg*
3 issues framed by the court
Whether observations by the learned Single Judge prejudicing subsequent civil litigation require modification in a writ appeal for clarification.
Whether the Trial Court will be influenced by clarified observations of the Single Judge regarding merits of the pending suit.
Whether the appeal requires disposal after clarifying that no opinion on merits was expressed by the Single Judge.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt. Rathnamma and Ors.
The Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District
B.V.Nagaratha
M.G.Uma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
