Allowed

Ajaya Marodia v. H N Suguna

Karnataka HC11 Nov 2024WP/16786/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Defendants in a partition suit sought a direction for expeditious disposal of O.S. No.263/2013, which had reached defendants' evidence stage. The High Court allowed the petition and directed the trial court to decide the suit within four months from conclusion of defendants' evidence.

What did the court decide?

Trial court directed to dispose of O.S. No.263/2013 within four months from conclusion of defendants' evidence.

Ajaya Marodia Vs H N Suguna — Partition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:45638 WP No. 16786 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 16786 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

AJAYA MARODIA S/O SHYAMASUNDAR MARODIA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

¶8

SMRITI MARODIA W/O AJAYA MARODIA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,

¶9

BOTH ARE R/O FLAT NO.4A ABHISARIKA BUILDING, NO-118, SOUTHERN AVENUE, CALCUTTA-700029.

¶10

ALSO R/O GLOBE POULTRY FARM, NEW NO.456/(447/4), SULIBELE ROAD, HOSKOTE TQ.

¶11

Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. S.B.HALLI, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

H.N. SUGUNA D/O LATE H.J. NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

¶16

H.N. GIRIJA D/O LATE H.J. NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

¶17

RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 ARE R/O K.R. ROAD, HOSKOTE TOWN.

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:45638 WP No. 16786 of 2024

¶19

H.N. ARUN KUMAR

¶20

S/O LATE H.J. NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,

¶21

H.N. MURALIKRISHNA S/O LATE H.J. NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

¶22

M/S KARNATAKA STATE FINANCE CORPORATION REPT. BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE AT NO.48 CHURCH STREET, BENGALURU -01.

¶23

B.S. DHANAJAYA S/O SHIVALINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O NO.341, BYRAPATNA VILLAGE, MOLAR POST-562 160 MALURU HOBLI, CHANNAPATTANA TQ., RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. ERAPPA REDDY M., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2;

¶26

VIDE ORDER DATED 10.07.2024, NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NOS.3 TO 6 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶27

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE TRIAL COURT TO DISPOSE OFF THE SUIT O.S.NO. 263/2013 PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIVIL AND JMFC AT HOSAKOTE, BENGALURU RURAL AT ANNEXURE-C AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE WITHIN A PERIOD OF 6 MONTHS.

¶28

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶29

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:45638 WP No. 16786 of 2024

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

The defendant Nos.5 and 6 in O.S No.263/2013 have filed this petition seeking for a direction to the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC., Hosakote, (henceforth referred to as ‘the Trial Court’) to dispose off the suit.

¶33

The suit in O.S. No.263/2013 was filed for partition of the plaintiffs’ 1/4^th share in the suit schedule property and consequential reliefs. The suit is contested by the defendant Nos.5 and 6. They claimed that the plaintiffs have no right, title or interest in the suit schedule property. The trial in the suit has begun and the suit is now listed for the evidence of the defendants.

¶34

The contention of the defendant Nos.5 and 6/petitioners is that the suit is proceeding at a snail’s pace and therefore, they requested for a direction to the Trial Court to dispose off the suit as expeditiously as possible.

¶35

Learned counsel for the plaintiffs/respondent Nos.1

¶36

and 2 submits that he has no objection for the Trial Court to dispose off the suit.

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:45638 WP No. 16786 of 2024

¶39

Having regard to the fact that the suit is now listed

¶40

for evidence of the defendants, it is appropriate to direct the Trial Court to dispose off the suit within four months from the date of the defendants concluding their evidence.

¶41

Consequently, this writ petition is allowed and the Trial Court is directed to dispose off the suit in O.S. No.263/2013 within four months from the date of conclusion of the evidence of the defendants.

Sd/JUDGE

(R. NATARAJ)

SMA

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 73

Ajaya Marodia v. H N Suguna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajaya Marodia v. H N Suguna

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

Sri Ullas Kottary Vs Suthan

Sri. Reddappa Vs Smt. Parvathamma

Sri. Hanumanthe Gowda Vs Smt. Mani Bai

Smt Shobha B Vs Smt Devamma

Sri. Narayanappa Vs Smt. Narayanamma

B C Kiran Vs H R Rudramma