Naganagouda A/F Hanumagouda … vs Kannagouda S/O Sannafakkirgouda on 17 July, 2009

2
"THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER CR? FILEDI}-[TS 115

op' cpc AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 30.6.2003 _§?ASS_E[} IN
(REVIEW) MISC. 19/ 1992 ON THE F'iLE OF 'I5.H3§34'_»PRL;;vCi'--11L

JUDGE (JR.DN.) as i ADD}... JMFC, _RANEBT§3N§I7'JR--,.b

msmlssmc; THE REWEW / M¥SC.CASE__.F¥3,E£}"*BY *m_E 
PETIHQNEE HEREIN SEEKENG; $0' RE';S'i'QR£}' *:*1'»u_';;_ SUI'IV'¥. '
910.194/1933, BY sE'mNc3 E31133' ;.'r":+_:E . O.R§3E;.RS.,_C)¥9 *

RECORDING THE coMPR0M1sE'D'r:)." 13.s;19*~3Q.«. " "

THIS PIETITION COMING 01%: FDR THIS'

DAY, THE comm MADE 'rH§;EE.:ejt:§,Eow'i«:«:;;E   
In this p€:tition,__t,1:iE._0.:§t_iVe%" d;"EttEC:i»~:V..'2§3{§:O6.2003 in Misc.

19/£9922'  Judge (Jr.[}n.) and Add}.

J . M. F'.    called in question.
' " LE2. "I9Etiti{)I1cé'r is '(Em defendant No.1 and responéent

   respondents No. 2 is the second

    "1E$pir.§ndent Nos. 3 and 4 an: the defendants No. 3

and v_-t~'§~ ftétém {he Trial Court. In this 3'ndgme11t for

 cofivsfiienm, 131:2: parties are referred tax) by their status btzfom

 -  Trial Court.

;_,7L\" /1"' 



3. Plaixltiflls filed O.S.No.194/1988 for _§}__artition

and mapanatc possession of their 2/3"' sham in

schedule promrti-:23. During the pendeunt-y 4, a

compmmise petifion came to be.;filt-If o1z.'S'i3;;~§:€:' . 

defendant No. 1 was not presizmt  thé i-[the "

compromise was not mc0m'Led'--~and the case 'x%;as.:.ad§Q12mcd '€139

the next date to keep prt3s€:z1_t___L:(Vi'e:t:'<_311d_a12t. ffhemaftar to
consiader the {:{)i3iipI'(;V3¥i3*.l;;'.'L{i,A1iJ:"_1e  adjourned the case

from time to time.   the Trial Court

aftejf   gaemam for the plaintiff alone
zecoz:'ci»c£1<.t1ie~  Aggrieved by this order of the
 Coiiid"  31}: compromise without the signatum

"~é;_=A.f¢::r;z.i§a_nt xNo;'}~'a11d in his absence, he filed a review

V  the '¥'I'ial Court under Order 4'? Rule 1 and 2

.' A   V151 of CPC. The piaintifi' and other defendants

 éappcamnce before the Trial Court in the (Review)

" »  'TM=5,sc.V'10/92 arid inter alia contemied that the review petition

 ignot maintainabie. The 'ma; Court afier hearing both the

' paxties passeé an arder on 09.12.1993 hok;I'H1g that the

review petéfion is maintaixlabla. Thereafter, the Trial Court

.<7*'4'awx

9'



recorded the evidence of both the parties.   of

defendant No.3, {we witnesses are examrlneci'

P.W.2 and Exhs.P1 to P6 a:r§r»~»e'::;2:1*ket:¥.;"'""':fi)V;2 "be"hatfv_V{fife

respondents, {me witness   and
Exh$.R1 and R2 are      
ixnpuyed order dated   the Misc.
petition mainly on  petition is not
maintajnable.  Hey}-ee.,._   Véeevigsion petition by

   

 " _  Véi4g2,ifi1ei1ts on both the side and perused.

the .e11!;iI'e 

' T.   is not in dispute that the review petition filed

"  defe'fi§3_a£3t No.1 came to be numbered as Mie<;.No.10[92.

Further, it is not in dispute that after hearing both the

 _ VTL15:s;rt17es, the Tris} Court vide €)Iflt':I' dated 09.12.1993 held

 that the review petition is maintainable. Without

considering this eariier order dated 09.12.1993, the Triai

Court eeemmitted an illegality in passing the ixnpugned order



S

dismissing the petition mainly on the gmeun'd&'  '?3&1e

petitictm is not maintainable. It is settled Q<_}é'§.fioI;:VAefv§a€=¢'  

the orders on intexim appiicaficiiie eperates.;'ae"fies_j'1idieé;xta 7.

in the same proceedings. :'}"hCI'E,LfQI1§;.V_{}1E a.p§}rba€h'Va§.€1a}%}ted

by the Txiai Court in passingv..1:h'e.i1npvi1gned. ec;rd§é;V i"gi1c$fmg its

earlier (mder is illegal; .perver's"e  uliable te   aside.

6. It_"is_ t}:1e,ti<51zte7£J'£;io1ie..Qf"defendant No.1 that the

compmmise.   f31C"'Tf};i&i.}.  is not binding on

him on   he bee not signed the compromise
petitikm and thVé£t';:heT' "wit authorised his advocate to Sign

the §:om'1_$i*<3;;fais.e...'-- Lin Réfippofi of this contention, defendant

 V.  .  .1  and aiso his advocate before the T rial

V   Again the Trial Court Without considering

.'   available on xecord cozmrtitted an fllegaiity in

passiiig the impugned order. Theiefore, 03 this ground also,

"   impugned ()I'd€':}' is liable to be set aside.

7. For the reasons stated above, the following:



  :21:  matter is pexiéing for

ORDER

The petitiozl is hereby afiowezi.

The impugned on_:;3e:r,__ dat;é€1″ ‘ii;

(Review) Misc. 19/9’92 pa:g;edTT».}:§y’ 13:5″ :=:,~3,

Judge (Jr.Dn.} §1n§i Aeic:;..”‘J,M.;§;c;;.;; -Ra.ge3begm1;+
is hereby set asizfié;-,:: — A ‘ V
The mattéf’ is the Trial Court for

firgsh dis;m5;az.,in”.a1c§o:aag::§e;aim law.

‘A T’ ” j ;_=; thg Court is hereby directed to

— _matter Within a time fraxtne of

‘V V_ t.i1zx:ie: fiofiifis frem the date of receipt of a copy

sag? –

A. oi;”f}ii’:s”0VIder.

cont£:11t:ions am left open.

1; Qfziiared acgtozdingly.

Sd/*
Judge