Mr. G. Suriya Narayanan Vs Malleshwaram Bhaktha Bhajana Mandali (Regd)

MR. G. SURIYA NARAYANAN S/O. LATE R GOPALA KRISHNA IYER, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT B-404, VDB CELADON HOSUING COMPLEX, SHIVANAHALLI VILLAGE, YELAHANKA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK, BANGALORE – 560 064.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. PRABHU M., ADVOCATE) AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

MALLESHWARAM BHAKTHA BHAJANA MANDALI (REGD.) NO.232/C, 4^TH MAIN MILK COLONY, MALLESHWARAM WEST BANGALORE – 560 015. REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENT MR. RANGANATHAN S.

¶14

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JAI PRAKASH RAO, ADVOCATE)

¶15

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(w) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.01.2020 PASSED IN MISC.NO.1117/2019, ON THE FILE OF THE XXXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-36), ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC.

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:36981 MFA No. 4130 of 2020

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶21

Though the appeal is listed for admission, with consent of both the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

¶22

This appeal is filed by the respondent in the Misc. Petition and plaintiff in the suit questioning the order dated 24.01.2020 passed in Misc.No.1117/2019 on the file of XXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru¹ (CCH-36), thereby, the Misc. petition filed by the defendant was allowed.

¶23

The appellant herein has filed the suit in O.S.Nos.8521/2018 against the respondent/defendant and the said suit was dismissed on 30.11.2019. Thereafter, the defendant has filed review petition in Misc.No.1117/2019

¶24

under Order XLVII read with Section 114 of CPC, with a prayer to review one sentence in the judgment of the Trial

¶25

1hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial Court’ for short

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:36981 MFA No. 4130 of 2020

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

Court found at paragraph Nos.9 and 10. The Trial Court in the suit has allowed the said review petition in Misc. No.1117/2019 and passed the following order:

¶29

“Petition is allowed.

¶30

The line ‘The plaintiff being a member of the society is going against the preamble of the Memorandum of Association of the defendant society’ found at Para No.10 is deleted.”

¶31

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted

¶32

that before passing the order under review petition in Misc. No.1117/2019 on the guise of reviewing the order, no notice was issued to the respondent (appellant herein) under the review petition in Misc. No.1117/2019. Therefore, prays to allow the appeal by setting aside the order passed in the above stated Misc. Petition.

¶33

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff justified the order passed in Misc. Petition and prays to dismiss the appeal.

¶34

The suit was dismissed on 30.11.2019. Thereafter, when the Misc. Petition is filed under Order

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:36981 MFA No. 4130 of 2020

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

XLVII read with Section 114 of CPC for reviewing the order, the Trial Court ought to have issued notice to the other side i.e., respondent in Misc. petition, but the record shows that in the review petition in Misc. No.1117/2019, notice was not served on the respondent in Misc. Petition.

¶38

The appellant/plaintiff has produced a certified copy of the order sheet passed under review petition in Misc. No.1117/2019, which proves the fact that the Trial Court, before passing the order under review petition in Misc.No.1117/2019 has not issued any notice to the other side; the order was reviewed and accordingly allowed the review petition in Misc. No.1117/2019 and deleted the sentence found at paragraph Nos.9 and 10. Therefore, the impugned order passed without issuing notice to the other side i.e., the respondent in Misc. No.1117/2019. Thus, the impugned order passed in the review petition in Misc. No.1117/2019is liable to be set aside and the matter is remanded to the Trial Court for fresh disposal to consider

¶39

5 -

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC:36981 MFA No. 4130 of 2020

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

the review petition in Misc. No.1117/2019 in accordance

¶43

with law after issuing notice to the other party.

¶44

In the result, I proceed to pass the following:

¶45

ORDER

¶46

i. The appeal is allowed .

¶47

ii. The order dated 24.01.2020 passed in Misc. No.1117/2019 on the file of XXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-36) is hereby set aside.

¶48

iii. The matter is remanded to the Trial Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law after hearing both sides.

¶49

iv. The review petition in Misc. No.1117/2019 is restored on its board before the Trial Court.

¶50

v. The Trial Court shall dispose of the Misc. Petition within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶51

vi. No order as to costs.

¶52

SD/(HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE

¶53

SRA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39

Mr. G. Suriya Narayanan v. Malleshwaram Bhaktha Bhajana Mandali (Regd)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. G. Suriya Narayanan v. Malleshwaram Bhaktha Bhajana Mandali (Regd)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Assistant Executive Engineer, Vs Shivashankara Bhat

Smt.Premaleela B.Setty Vs Sri.Rejendra @ Santhosh Kumar

Sri Jayasheela Shetty Vs Sri Nagaraj Shetty

Sri K H Khan Vs Smt.Ashwini

Smt. Akheela Begum Vs Sri Nadimulla Khan

Mrs Keerthi Vs Mr Kushal Raj Ostwal