SRI. ANNAIAH C V., ADVOCATE) v. THE TRIAL COURT IN O.S.NO.529/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE II
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
writ petition is upheld and the petition is dismissed as not
Provisions considered
Judgment
SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O. SRI. MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS, R/AT. ARINAGANAHALLI, THORADEVANDAHALLI POST, HOLUR HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN CODE - 563 126 (BY SRI. HANUMANTHA T., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ANNAIAH C V., ADVOCATE) …PETITIONER Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND:
SMT. UMA D/O. SRI ASHWATHA GOWDA, W/O SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT. NEELAKANTAPURA VILLAGE, CHAMARAHALLI POST, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN CODE - 563126.
SMT. KAVITHA A D/O. SRI. ASHWATH GOWDA, W/O. SRI. KAMALESH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT. NO.18, VIRABHADRAPPA ROAD, RAMASWAMY PALYA, MARUTHISEVA NAGAR BANGALORE - 560 033.
SMT. NETHRAVATHI D/O SRI. ASHWATH GOWDA, - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:51630 WP No. 33734 of 2024 W/O SRI. NARAYANASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT. NERNAHALLI VILLAGE, MUDUVATHI POST VOKKALERI HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN CODE - 563 130.
SRI. ASHWATHA GOWDA S/O LATE CHINNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS,
SRI. MUNIREDDY, S/O ASHWATHA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
SRI. NAGESH, S/O ASHWATHA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
SRI. MANJUNATH, S/O ASHWATHA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
SRI. UMESHA, S/O ASHWATHA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
SRI. SOMESHEKAR S/O ASHWATHA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS PETITIONERS NO.4 TO 9 ARE R/AT ARINAGANAHALLI, THORADEVANDAHALLI POST, HOLUR HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN CODE - 563 126. THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE TRIAL COURT IN O.S.NO.529/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE II …RESPONDENTS - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:51630 WP No. 33734 of 2024 ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT KOLAR AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIAL COURT ON I.A.NO.4 PASSED IN O.S.NO.529/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT KOLAR VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged an order dated 05.09.2024 passed in O.S.No.529/2023 on an application (I.A.No.IV) filed by her under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) of Civil Procedure Code.
2. The office has raised an objection that writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable and the appropriate remedy available to the petitioner is to file a revision petition under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code.
3. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the same is passed on an application filed by the petitioner under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) of Civil Procedure Code. - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:51630 WP No. 33734 of 2024
4. In view of the above, the revision petition alone is maintainable and not writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order impugned.
Operative part
5. Hence, office objection regarding maintainability of writ petition is upheld and the petition is dismissed as not maintainable.
6. Office is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned order to the learned counsel for the petitioner after retaining a photocopy.
7. The time consumed in pursuing this petition shall be deducted while calculating limitation applicable to a revision petition. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: writ petition is upheld and the petition is dismissed as not
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Constitution of India — art. 227.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.