Disposed

Tanuja Sathish Kumar v. Mrs. K Anuradha

Karnataka HC18 Dec 2024WP/34026/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Plaintiffs in an ejectment suit sought a direction to the Trial Court to decide their pending applications for deposit of arrears of rent, which remained undecided despite an earlier High Court direction. The writ petition was disposed of directing disposal of the applications within three months after winter vacation.

What did the court decide?

Trial Court directed to consider and dispose of I.A.Nos.1 and 4 within three months after reopening after winter vacation, 2024.

Tanuja Sathish Kumar Vs Mrs. K Anuradha — Landlord and Tenant | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:52469 WP No. 34026 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 34026 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

TANUJA SATHISH KUMAR W/O. LATE SATISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

¶8

SHREYAS SATISH KUMAR S/O LATE. SATISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS, (REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER PETITIONER NO. 1 AS HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN)

¶9

SANJANA SATISH KUMAR D/O. LATE SATISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,

¶10

RAJESH JAYARAM S/O LATE D. JAYARAM AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,

¶11

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SRI. HARISH JAYARAM S/O LATE D. JAYARAM AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

¶13

ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE RESIDING AT

¶14

NO.498, 3^RD MAIN, 1^ST BLOCK, BANASHANKARI 1^ST STAGE, BANGALORE - 560050

¶15

…PETITIONERS

¶16

(BY SRI. CHANDAN K., ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

MRS. K. ANURADHA W/O. M. MARIMUTHU, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, SITE NO.1013 (GROUND FLOOR),

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:52469 WP No. 34026 of 2024

¶20

9^TH MAIN, 9^TH CROSS, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM, BANGALORE-560 086.

¶21

…RESPONDENT

¶22

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE COURT OF XXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE TO CONSIDER AND PASS ORDERS ON IA 1 AND IA 4 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS (PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-H AND J RESPECTIVELY) IN O.S.NO.1935/2021 AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

The plaintiff Nos.2(a), 2(b), 2(c), 3 and 4 in O.S.No.1935/2011 on the file of XXV Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru (henceforth referred to as 'Trial Court' for short) are before this Court seeking for a direction to the Trial Court to consider and dispose off I.A.Nos.1 and 4 filed on 19.03.2021 and 18.01.2022.

¶27

The aforesaid suit was filed for ejectment of the defendants from the suit schedule property. The plaintiffs filed applications namely, I.A.Nos.1 and 4 for direction to the defendants to deposit the arrears of rent.

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:52469 WP No. 34026 of 2024

¶30

It is contended that though objections to the said applications were filed, the Trial Court has not disposed off the same. It is also contended that the petitioners had earlier approached this Court in W.P.No.4177/2024 and this Court in terms of the order dated 29.02.2024 had directed the Trial

¶31

Court to dispose off the applications within a period of three months. It is contended that despite such direction, the Trial Court has not considered the applications. Therefore, the petitioners have approached this Court.

¶32

Since the petitioners have sought for an innocuous

¶33

reliefs, notice to the respondents is dispensed with.

¶34

In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed off directing the Trial Court to consider and dispose off I.A.Nos.1 and 4 within an outer limit of three months after reopening of the Courts after winter vacation, 2024, failing which, the petitioners will be at liberty to take necessary steps in accordance with law.

¶35

Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

¶36

¶37

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52

Tanuja Sathish Kumar v. Mrs. K Anuradha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tanuja Sathish Kumar v. Mrs. K Anuradha

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

Union of India Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.K.S.Sachidananda Vs Nirmala Ganga Education Trust

Tci Express Ltd. Vs Maxon Precision Motor India Pvt. Ltd.

Sri. v. Manohar Vs Smt. K.J. v. Jayalakshmi

Sri Galappa Vs Hanumantharayappa

Ms. Shazia Fathima Ahmed @ Shazia Ahmed Vs M/S Taj Palace