Dismissed

Sri. Nagaraj S/O Shankrappa v. Smt. Sanna Hallamma

Karnataka HC25 Mar 2022WP/101818/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition challenging an order that precluded the petitioner from filing objections. Since the petitioner filed objections after the interim order but before the preliminary hearing, the petition lost survival. The court directed transmission of the stipulated cost deposit to the trial court and disposed of the writ.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of; the directed cost deposit of Rs. 5,000 was transmitted to the Civil Court at Sandur.

Sri. Nagaraj S/O Shankrappa Vs Smt. Sanna… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF MARCH 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.101818/2016 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

SRI. NAGARAJ S/O SHANKRAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, HINDU, AGRICULTURIST, R/O VADDU IVILLAGE, SANDUR TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT.

¶9

.. PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. SATISH M.S., ADV.)

¶11

AND :

¶12

1 . SMT. SANNA HALLAMMA D/O JAMBAMMA, W/O DODDABASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,

¶13

2 . GADILINGAPPA S/O LATE DODDABASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,

¶14

3 . JUMBLA HALLAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS

¶15

A. SMT.SHANKRAMMA W/O LATE JUMBLA HALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST,

¶16

B. SWAMY S/O LATE HUMBLA HALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST,

¶17

C. RAMESH S/O LATE JUMBLA HALLAPPA

¶18

¶19

AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST,

¶20

D. PUSHAMMA D/O LATE JUMBLA HALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST,

¶21

4 . JUMBLA BASAPPA S/O LATE SOMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST,

¶22

ALL ARE R/O VADDU VILLAGE, SANDUR TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT.

¶23

.. RESPONDENTS

¶24

(RESPONDENTS 1, 2, 3 (A) TO (D) AND 4 ARE SERVED.)

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED:17.10.2015, PASSED BY HON'BLE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SANDUR, IN FDP.NO.2/2012, VIDE ANNEXURE-D. CONSEQUENTLY, PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO FILE OBJECTIONS TO IA.NO.2 IN FDP.NO.2/2012, PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SANDUR.

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

ORDER

¶28

In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:

¶29

a. Issue an order or direction or necessary writ of certiorari by quashing the order dated 17.10.2015, passed by Hon'ble Civil Judge and JMFC at Sandur, in FDP.No.2/2012, vide Annexure-D.

¶30

b. Consequently, permit the petitioner to file objections to IA.No.2 in FDP.No.2/2012, pending before the Hon'ble Civil Judge and JMFC at Sandur.

¶31

¶32

2. This Court by order dated 02.03.2016 passed

¶33

the following order:

¶34

“ Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶35

The Court below, in the Final Decree Proceedings instituted by the respondents, has posted the matter for hearing on IA.No.II, thereby recording that petitioner herein did not file any objection.

¶36

Indeed, it is noticed that he has sought for time to file objections. But, without granting time, the matter has been adjourned for consideration of I.A.No.II treating as no objection filed.

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if one opportunity is granted, objections will be filed by the petitioner.

¶38

Hence, issue emergency notice to the respondents, on condition that petitioner deposits Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand only) before this Court towards cost payable to the respondents.

¶39

Petitioner is also permitted to serve on the advocate appearing for the respondents in the trial court.

¶40

It is made clear that if the respondents have no objection for the petitioner to file objections to I.A.No.II, the Court below may proceed to record their no objection and receive the objections to be filed by the petitioner and proceed further in the matter, in which event, respondents will be entitled to receive the cost deposited before this Court. if for any reason, respondents want to have objections for the same, the matter will be heard by this Court.

¶41

Subject to the above condition, passing of orders on I.A.No.II shall be deferred by the trial Court for a period of four weeks.

¶42

Re-list this matter on 14^th March 2016.”

¶43

¶44

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the petitioner

¶45

has filed objections to I.A. No.II. Therefore, the relief sought in this writ petition will not survive for consideration. Further, this Court in the aforesaid order had directed the petitioner to deposit Rs.5,000/- before this Court towards cost payable to the respondents. Since the respondents in this petition are served and unrepresented, the office is directed to transmit this amount to the Civil Court in FDP No.2/2012 pending on the file of the learned Civil Judge and JMFC at Sandur and the trial Court is directed to release Rs.5,000/in favour of petitioners/respondents herein.

¶46

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed off.

¶47

Sd/JUDGE

¶48

Kmv

Sri. Nagaraj S/O Shankrappa v. Smt. Sanna Hallamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Nagaraj S/O Shankrappa v. Smt. Sanna Hallamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ammanna S/O Awadhoot Odeyar Vs Siddappa S/O Basappa Ainapur

Belgaum District Hand Ball Association (R) Vs the Hand Ball Federation of India

Prashant S/O. Nageshrao Kulkarni Vs the Union of India

Shri B Shankrappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Sayeda Ahmadi Sahabjadi Vs Sayed Hussain Shah S/O Sayed Usman Shah

Akkawwa W/O Shivanand Parasannavar Vs Gadigewwa W/O Yallappa Divatagi