Writ petition by defendant No.2(a) against trial Court order permitting plaintiffs to re-open their case and mark certain documents. The High Court held objections to relevance could be raised at arguments and declined to interfere.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:23144 WP No. 9887 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.9887 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by V MANJUSHA BAI Location: High Court of Karnataka
REPRESENTED THROUGH THEIR SPA HOLDER: SRI KIRAN KUMAR S/O SRI G.S. SHIVAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.1065, 6TH MAIN ROAD 3RD STAGE, 3RD BLOCK WEST OF CORD ROAD BASAVESWARANAGAR BENGALURU-79.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI CHANDRASHEKAR L., ADVOCATE)
AND:
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
NOTE: (THE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1959).
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. B.V. VIDYULATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R.1; R.2 AND R.4: SERVED; NOTICE TO R.3 IS DISPENSED WITH
VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 29.09.2023.)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2023, PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE VI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU CITY, (CCH-11), IN O.S.NO.3877/2010, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A, ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
NC: 2024:KHC:23144 WP No. 9887 of 2023
have been marked, but marking of the said documents is not relevant to the case. However, the trial Court has permitted marking of the said documents, and it is always open for the petitioner to take up a contention before the trial Court in the arguments that the said documents are not relevant to the case and it does not establish the case of the plaintiffs in any manner whatsoever.
SD/JUDGE
VMB
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial Court erred in re-opening the plaintiffs' case and permitting marking of documents under I.A.Nos.1 to 3 in O.S.No.3877/2010.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Dr. Chaitan S.M.
The Karnataka State Judicial Employees House Building Co-operative Society Limited
The President, The Karnataka State Judicial Employees House Building Co-operative Society Limited
Sri E.N. Parama Shivayya
Master Rithvik (minor, rep. by S.M. Chaitan)
M.I.Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
