✦ Karnataka High Court

AGUSTINE JOSEPH v. V. KRISHNAMURTHY RAO

CRP No. 335 of 2011H G RAMESH

Case at a glance

Judgment

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH C.R.P.No.335/2011 BETWEEN: AGUSTINE JOSEPH S/O. JOSEPH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 283, 31ST MAIN, 8TH CROSS H.S.R. LAYOUT, SECTOR-1 BANGALORE - 560 034 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. D.V.SATYANARAYAN, ADVOCATE) AND : V. KRISHNAMURTHY RAO AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS S/O. VENKATA RAO 168, 13TH CROSS GIRINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 085 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAMESH CHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 18 OF SMALL CAUSES COURT ACT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.09.2011 PASSED IN S.C.1222/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE IV-ADDL. JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE, DISMISSING I.A.NO.15 FILED U/O- 7, RULE-11 OF CPC. THIS CRP COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: -2-

O R D E R CRP No.335/2011 H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral): This revision petition by the defendant is directed against an interlocutory order dated 20.09.2011 passed by the trial court dismissing I.A.No.15 filed by the petitioner in the suit in S.C.No.1222/2011. The suit is for ejectment of the petitioner. I.A.No.15 was filed for dismissal of the suit on the ground that the suit is barred by the Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 ('the Act').

2.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.

3.

It is stated that the suit is now posted for judgment. Having regard to the fact that the suit has reached the stage of judgment, I decline to interfere with the impugned order. However, the contention of -3- CRP No.335/2011 the petitioner/defendant that the suit is barred under Section 2(3)(f) of the Act is kept open to be adjudicated by the trial court at the time of final disposal of the suit without being influenced by the observations made in the course of the impugned order. Petition disposed of. hkh. Sd/- JUDGE

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Karnataka High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. CRP No. 335 of 2011). ← Search more judgments