Disposed

Taluk Panchayath v. Smt. Rajeevi B. Shetty

Karnataka HC16 Feb 2024WP/11891/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitions by Taluk Panchayath and Grama Panchayath challenging interlocutory appellate orders in a 2016 suit were not decided on merits; the High Court directed the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously within six months, clarifying that the injunction against dispossession without due process of law would not bar lawful recourse.

What the court decided

AI extract

Taluk Panchayath Vs Smt. Rajeevi B. Shetty — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:6732 WP No. 11891 of 2017 C/W WP No. 11760 of 2017 WP No. 11890 of 2017 WP No. 12398 of 2017 WP No. 12399 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 11891 OF 2017 (GM-CPC)

¶7

C/W

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 11760 OF 2017 (GM-CPC) WRIT PETITION NO. 11890 OF 2017 (GM-CPC) WRIT PETITION NO. 12398 OF 2017 (GM-CPC) WRIT PETITION NO. 12399 OF 2017 (GM-CPC) IN W.P.NOS.11891/2017, 11760/17 AND 11890/2017

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

TALUK PANCHAYATH KARKALA, BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH KARKALA - 574 104.

¶11

….COMMON PETITIONER

¶12

Digitally signed by PAVITHRA N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

(BY SRI. CHANDRANATH ARIGA .K., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

SMT. RAJEEVI B. SHETTY AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS W/O. BHASKAR SHETTY SOMESHWARA, NADPALU VILLAGE POST: SOMESHWARA - 576 112 KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT.

¶16

THE NADPAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, NADPALU - 576 112 POST: SOMESHWARA - 576 112 KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:6732 WP No. 11891 of 2017 C/W WP No. 11760 of 2017 WP No. 11890 of 2017 WP No. 12398 of 2017 WP No. 12399 of 2017

¶20

(BY SRI. JAYAKARA SHETTY H., ADVOCATE FOR C/R1;

¶21

SRI SANATH KUMAR SHETTY., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶22

WRIT PETITION NO.11891 OF 2017 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 28.02.2017 IN M.A.NO.6/2016 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ACJM KARKALA VIDE ANNEX-L. REJECT I.A.NO.2 IN O.S.NO.58/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL., CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KARKALLA VIDE ANNEX-B & C AND ETC.,

¶23

WRIT PETITION NO.11760 OF 2017 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 18.04.2016 IN I.A.NO.2 TO THE EXTENT OF PARTLY ALLOWING THE SAME IN O.S.NO.58/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KARKALLA VIDE ANNEX-J. QUASH THE ORDER DATED 28.02.2017 IN M.A.NO.5/2016 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ACJM KARKALA VIDE ANNEX-K. REJECT I.A.NO.2 IN O.S.NO.58/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL., CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KARKALLA AND ETC.,

¶24

WRIT PETITION NO.11890 OF 2017 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 28.02.2017 IN M.A.NO.7/2016 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ACJM KARKALA VIDE ANNEX-L. REJECT I.A.NO.3 IN O.S.NO.58/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL., CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KARKALLA AND ETC.,

¶25

IN W.P.NO.12398/2017

¶26

BETWEEN:

¶27

THE NADPAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, NADPAL GRAMA PANCYAYAT, NADAPAL, UDUPI DIST, KARKAL TALUK.

¶28

…..PETITIONER

¶29

(BY SRI SANATH KUMAR SHETTY .K., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

¶30

¶31

NC: 2024:KHC:6732 WP No. 11891 of 2017 C/W WP No. 11760 of 2017 WP No. 11890 of 2017 WP No. 12398 of 2017 WP No. 12399 of 2017

¶32

AND:

¶33

THE TALUK PANCHAYATH KARKALA, BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH KARKALA - 574 104.

¶34

SMT. RAJEEVI B. SHETTY AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS W/O. BHASKAR SHETTY SOMESHWARA NADPALU VILLAGE POST: SOMESHWARA - 576 112 KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT.

¶35

…RESPONDENTS

¶36

(BY SRI. JAYAKARA SHETTY H., ADVOCATE FOR C/R2;

¶37

SRI. CHANDRANATH ARIGA .K., ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)

¶38

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 28.02.2017 IN M.A.NO.7/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ACJM, KARKALLA VIDE ANNEX-A REVERSING THE ORDER DTD.18.4.2016 PASSED ON I.A.NO.III IN O.S.NO.58/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, KARKALLA VIDE ANNEXB AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED VIDE ANNEX-B AND ETC.,

¶39

IN W.P.NO. 12399/2017

¶40

BETWEEN:

¶41

THE NADPAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, NADPAL GRAMA PANCYAYAT, NADAPAL, UDUPI DIST, KARKAL TALUK.

¶42

…..PETITIONER

¶43

(BY SRI SANATH KUMAR SHETTY .K., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

¶44

¶45

NC: 2024:KHC:6732 WP No. 11891 of 2017 C/W WP No. 11760 of 2017 WP No. 11890 of 2017 WP No. 12398 of 2017 WP No. 12399 of 2017

¶46

AND:

¶47

THE TALUK PANCHAYATH KARKALA, BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH KARKALA - 574 104.

¶48

SMT. RAJEEVI B. SHETTY AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS W/O. BHASKAR SHETTY DOOR NO.1-52(1), HOTEL SHRIDEVI (NOW HOTEL KARAVALI), SOMESHWARA NADPALU VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 571 201.

¶49

…RESPONDENTS

¶50

(BY SRI. JAYAKARA SHETTY H., ADVOCATE FOR C/R2; SRI. CHANDRANATH ARIGA .K., ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)

¶51

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER DATED 28.02.2017 IN M.A.NO.6/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ACJM, KARKALLA VIDE ANNEX-A AND THE ORDER DTD.18.4.2016 PASSED ON I.A.NO.II IN O.S.NO.58/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, KARKALLA VIDE ANNEX-B AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED VIDE ANNEX- A AND B AND ETC.,

¶52

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR FURTHER ARGUMENTS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶53

ORDER

¶54

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners in these writ petitions are either Taluk Panchayath arrayed as defendant No.1 or Grama Panchayath arrayed as defendant No2 before the Trial Court. They are impugning the

¶55

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:6732 WP No. 11891 of 2017 C/W WP No. 11760 of 2017 WP No. 11890 of 2017 WP No. 12398 of 2017 WP No. 12399 of 2017

¶56

order dated 28.02.2017 passed in MA Nos.5, 6 and 7 of 2016 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Jude and ACJM, Karkala. Now issues are already framed by the Trial Court and the plaintiff will have to lead the evidence. Instead of considering the writ petitions and passing a detailed order, the Trial Court may be directed to expedite the trial and dispose off the same, at an earliest.

¶57

Learned counsel for the respondents submits no

¶58

objections for expeditious disposal of the suit by the Trial Court.

¶59

The suit is of the year 2016. Therefore, the Trial Court is directed to dispose off the suit expeditiously, with the co-operation of both the parties, at least within six months from the date of receipt of the order.

¶60

Learned counsel for the petitioners expressed his apprehension that the order passed in MA Nos.5, 6 and 7 of 2016, allowing IA Nos.2 and 3 not to dispossess the plaintiff without due process of law should not come in the way of defendants to initiate the procedure as contemplated under law. It is made clear that since the First Appellate Court

¶61

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:6732 WP No. 11891 of 2017 C/W WP No. 11760 of 2017 WP No. 11890 of 2017 WP No. 12398 of 2017 WP No. 12399 of 2017

¶62

granted injunction not to dispossess the plaintiff without due process of law, the same would not come in the way of the defendants to have the recourse to the dispossession of the plaintiff in accordance with law, if they are advised to do so.

¶63

With the above observations, the writ petition stands

¶64

disposed off .

¶65

Sd/JUDGE

¶66

SPV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

Taluk Panchayath v. Smt. Rajeevi B. Shetty

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Taluk Panchayath v. Smt. Rajeevi B. Shetty

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Majeed Ahmad Vs State of Karnataka by

Suruthalappa Vs K D Thimmappa

Sri Kotraiah M S Vs Sri Rudresh P S

Smt Roopa Devi Vs Smt. Savithramma

Sri Ramappa Vs Sri.B.v.Sampath

Sri. Rameshwarial Vs Smt. Saravani Devi