High Court Karnataka High Court

Kalavathi vs C M Abu Mohammed Since Deceased By … on 24 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Kalavathi vs C M Abu Mohammed Since Deceased By … on 24 April, 2009
Author: B.S.Patil


2:; THE may comm or-* mmwawmm AT BANGALORE
mrrmu THIS THE 24TH DAY or APRIL, 2009». Q
BEFORE V V

THE Hozmns MR.JUsT1c;E_3.s. P_ATmVVVV . V

WRIT PE’.!’§TION Ha. 11554 03? 209;?’ (tmV;cV:_5c*.%V V3 7

BE’I”WEE1’§:

1, Suit. Kaiassathi,
B/0. Late V.C.§/eniqataéiitaaiiearfi, V’
Aged abaut 5Q ysagrzs, ‘ V 3 ‘ V
R ,1′ 0 féo.13’?, ~. V
C:ommerci.a1Stres:t., V
Be-mgalere -~ 56396.1. 1

N

813%. V. P. S2;:«;ms}:~ }<IV¥;i1:V:.;_ar,"-..jf–.. K — _

S/G. Late VV.-V..Pan:111ra*ig'an:,.' «. V V

Qsgaci a1}i§"t;E. 3'eéi}f5,– V » V'

Rfo, §€o.?']:4,V VI}.:§${;1i"{3oi:)1iy3__ _

393- S'm'::::t,V' if-'emm%3;Vi&-xi 1riigVh;.__Ri;~a<;i,

Chfinnai :7 500 0-:2.—.. = _ " " pnwmomcas

{By Sri. $3'.Ia6¢ACh:.%ir1d.V:as'}i§kV§::r, Exdv' far
9:1. Asia; %%%%% V' .

gnimgy ‘-

1, VV€;”§.AV§/I–,–:5;I:§Vi:§!E@:~l1é;fidVI/33.626″,
V Singe dec&a$r3{:i by his LE3

_. ; .. -{3} Smi, {Z-,A.2«::rhra,

‘V * Eggs tam Abu Mahammeé,
_ = W301’

” gig: Sn; CvA.M0hidi11 Munawar,

‘ S/0 Late Abu Mehammed

(c) Sri. CA. Amefin Kausar,

S] 0 Late Abu Mohammad

mgw

Caurt, it is €}bS€I”V€d, that pcfificnem intended to relv ripen the
documents in HRC Pefition N0.2{)O/1975 and EX(i’:C1ItiOIi Case
No.353/19??’ which they were not diligent to secure 8§;’~_.{hES€

yaars since 2002. It has been further Qrdereci in

pefitian that only to ensure that the pI’occediri§s fiét

unneaessaziiy pratzacted, {hi3 Court .1:.3d._ 4isstdie:€}’vV”i1:;../I.I;.’r1{?i’ u

Writ Petitions bearing W. F’. No.97 191:’00§?;’_;:m&1 97853%T~.$4g”;3}i)*as§;1vTa.

d;i1’€C’£iOI1 that Within two weeksfziit; peti’tiQI1v2.I’_S:

their evidsncé and no fiifiher be ‘gi~3i:_i::3év § to thsm.
Despite the Said co11{ii:ti::>rV{, .fi«3.€y?{_b’ Arcame up in WP’
N0.9′?’2{}]2€)€}9 C/22?. W.:P;§’$6}1T»/V2Q&i39′ ihai certgifiad

C0§iCS of the ciqchmtéiits wéreinfit s_*_-…1V:}:_::3:V:’};i;::5V?Qj_€__<i;i:170n«VVp:'fi11ci13g the xerox copicas of the
d3cumer:t$':LI_14'HRCV.?efii§<:§£z–..__Z§€t;;"L'29G/ 1§'?'5 and Exacution (Ease

930.353; '19';f'?. i13 §:hafvi%:w 5:' the matter, this Court permitteii

{3e7titioi:£e::rsf"'?:Q markwfiéérax copies 0f the documents subject to

VVCs;a£id;5§V{;;§ ":a}V§;:3f£ :hc: patitianer isrsduces the certified (tspiefi

withi:;__ t Ir3e be fixed by the Trial Caurt, Observation was

-. gigs madcvvié the efiisct that the Registry, City Civil Qourt, Mayo

}5*E;é_j},,§§’ziit, Bangaiere $11311 make necessary endsavours ‘:9 issue

tgéertified Copieg sf {kg éocument applied by the peiitioners as

V.

J

eariy as pcsssibla. it was also made V613′ cigar mat :10 fiirther

i’}}}p{3E”£’tl£1}:t§’ xvi}; be giver: t9 the petitiezzfirs fer p1″0dus;:i’£i;{‘}:?:V.V’:t:§} ‘e;§2ii35.

ether dccuments or for any othtsr evidence in i.}}{;:._filE§:’f’E€fI: V’

that the pa1*fifes $11311 cmoperate vajfitii “fig; ‘ .gj:x3I;1I”1″: ‘F;.7%t_2}.{3’§ig:;”

ensufing that this: proceedings attain £’11i:é:2VE__itbj;=’§i§(pe(iit;i»<.)i1s:1j;r. VV

3. The presmnt Writ f:w0–fi:31d
grievance that (i) 2: transléfir dgxfing the
course of t§§.A 13f

Transiator. A meme is a1isget:11yff§1_ed béfifitr

regard.

5. The Court below _p’s:»2;ss{ea$ u éfidflr as unéer,
“Memo filed far by 4?’? Ei€f€§}CIz3ci}I: ‘f€§I” Translator fer
eviéence cf D.W,V-53; ~ fiéiridsnée1aii~ea{I:{V«;ié:iiided. Hence meme
3″6j€C’i”.€(i.”. In gietition is fxieci.

6;. In {fig eniirtv $11 the W331: Pfitiiian, nothing

is said as to 1z;?i;ethef”3§}Lfg” €;g;é’s3.ti0;1 asked tea or answered by the

;§etitio:1:{:f has bszmii .x§f5J§:iI1g}j§’ regarded, nor is there any gziavanég

giféfiifiuners than: in vitiw Gf ihc Cougrt being net

caziwserfisaafigt-.x$;%–§§i1 iafiguage in which the Witness answereé

the q1:’e.st:£:31:s,.V 5&6 version Of $16 wimess 923$ :10: cormcfly

” ‘;s:%o;d€c1. ”

Qfilfi 6% of the Karnataka Civii Rulss af Practice

“:3:£§f:h: cszé3€s $316 Camrt to anzai} the sexvimg of an Entfirprczter x.x;*he11

3 Witness add new aviaiance in 3 lazraguage mat understood by “?£h.e

5;?

gr:

0′? …

{hurt This is not a Cass Where {£16. Court hat} net. ‘un{ie:*:§.?£00&

the €Vi{§€I1{f€ given by the Witness and therefore the C;}i1:’tu’§?(i’ii’€ €_:lSV]:{G§’:

hat in a laxxguage xmt knawn to her. ‘f11r’t’ft;r:’i° ._

she was cenversant with Tamil “FV3m.1;'”w_;..=«.s :1éi.__fuE1yk;:pii~véfsaiit in ”

Engfish’ T113 fast that hex. C3c>u;1sé:1;.’f§z;zas~..LA1.1G1:. ‘ £§tCq¥.j1a.iIit€& with
Tami} language is no grouiiéi«f<3Ar":3:<f§i§}:s;{i;§igA.'fzyzf3.}§'i3Qi11tment of
an Interpreter. in attempt made
by the p6titi0I1¢1?s§3,,..1p to be 0:11;; is
drag 011 th§~:__ made: it ciear that the
d€fez1daunt%;v' slzafi €'eri<:i€:n<:e ans} cooperate: with
the stourt: b£A§io§§-' in disposal of tha cases .121 féatcz,

such a ::£ize:":s:;'s':;§.r:311V is a;1§'ea6.}?' issue& by this Court in the pravioufi

w£*":'i péiitjmizis 515$ Wei}.

8.A ._ genuine diflficulty for ma caunmi far the

‘g3;sfen&é”31£ 30.59′: tmaiergtanding {ha Language in whim}: the

” 4A3cie:§1&:1:iant wéis afiswermg, such 3 raqufist might to have 136311

::3é:£;é’ ~€;r§°fie:* or far that matter 11$ $hs:m}£i have hémssfi’ maezie

:L’ci«.’;°3_”£i.T}2g€II1€2}i to urxderstanfi the Eanguaga. This is 1:19: a case

-aiéhcra the Smart has faiieé. 3:9 zrzxxdersiarad the a;13.’s,we:*s givsn by

$16 $¥’i§fl€SS and Ehzjmfere was imndicappeci in zrecording the

1%

évidfificfi {sf E).W.–4-. Hence, in such circumstancss;-;.._ the

grievance: made regarciirzg non-=appoi11tmem: of a Trmisla-fé§r.VG.r

an inéiaxpmtar has no substance.

9. In so far as the grieva11=::e magic

refusal sf the (201111: belaw to t\xio “:;_k§’€ume3j1iu;:A Via

harem above, it is seen from the pasécfi”‘i;;.V-1{11§g»;E;;;;#:vi0u3
writ petition that pefifidfiar 5321: the
doeuments in HRS Petition’ §;9′}?43V”§ t§£;i__’_Ex€cufi011 Cage:

$0.353/1977 furnished and
011131 xemx j’£:<;.?;'V:t'§:,;gV.' Copies. Evfifii if the
Court beléizy "flag flifi pefifianer to mark {he

campiaint gi{?é1}_ %t<3 3:3 Ai§égi§:rar an (}1.G4.2009 or the Capy

–‘aiI@ ;}1ic.’f~:€$’:}1: gitrcézz <f$Ii";33,_€§}3..v20G9 sacking the certiiieci capies, the

:;o'i.§:1._éi;11y way afibct tha mamsr. In fact, it is 03:11:; 03::

gT1'x,:;V-;1gvV:"d' V"_?':;.'1a7iQ;;'despite makizxg an appiicatiou 'befcaré that

v§}e§v:1t§;§ ';?€gVi:s.tfaé:3£', City ffiivii Court, Maya Hail, Bangalore am}

' fi'::r$p§i:: necessary @f£"<:s:"ts 'ta secum tbs: cerfifisd Cepies Qf

_;ti:o$.§ "fi5€35'::t1m6::1%:s in BBC and execufian Case '(ha émuments

net furnished in the petitioners herein, this Court

fiermitted £1123 peiitiorxers ta mark xemxi copies 0f iihzirsfi

é.0<:2u.::<3te:1ts fimugh Qf ceurse with the C{:3}.1S€:}.{ given by the 92:11::

gi

side. Thei:mfore, qu5:s'£im1 of ssparatsijz marking the c0py_.r::__f the

apyiication filed seeking the cartified. capies of the doc1s;33éii?.$"<);

for that matier copy of the cemplaiflt filetci to. "*£–h6: *
Registmr in {his regard does mat a:1'isc:_,…..H_¢Ifie 1;€~: 'c:1;eaL1:j V
that tha petitiozizsrs hemén aria trying IE0 :;§:_1'111-i§ce';«:s.aJr'ii:§?

E116 mattflr and have some ufi '1-x;ifi1 t;'Q6:sc\ aésc:1f¥:ic»nVs 53nd 2 L'

den:1az1ds that cannot be justified. b
For the €i.fOI'£?£}£{(fiI13Zi€}I1'§?;"t'3'fi 1vsa ns_(_)1§.$:;. Eiiiit petition, being

fievoid of merits, is ciisn1i3s:;'d;"' %

%%%% M Sd/___
% Judge