1/ i'$'i'i for Pref. K.S. -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNA'§'AKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 3333 DAY Q17-3' JUNE, 20£3§_ BEFORE THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE RAvf1g2i:a;:,1m§*:'1¥£T' A
WRIT PETITION N0.942.5 (L5? §o{}’:'(§1-}5§7¢1~(%i1-5f(%_3) f
BETWEEN :
Sri.
3/0 La§*’3’J3~V*ii1T»&.3’ig'<?"9'?Ci?%:
Aged aE,3ouft€g{) '
Res3Z_d._ing" '5**'=;;:.Qress,_ V' "
Yet;haga{i23h_a11i'n:Rcad',., j
Ganesha TeI1{p1e'St1":?¢t-, ' '
Arkeshwar H
GuthaViL.CAoion3', ' "
Mandya ” ._ ”
PETITIONER
‘ V’ Associates, Advocates}
I. “‘7£’h:a=: Commissioner,
AA : {)ity'”Corporation,
V . _ Qiandya.
2. Chowdayya,
S / 0 Chikkaputtegowda,
Aged about 55 years,
R/0 Yathagadahaili Roaé,
Sm Cross, Ganesha Temple Street,
Arkeshwara Nagar,
Guthaiu Colony, 1 ‘
Mandya City, ” _ A ~
Mandya, ,e.._…..REASPONDE3N.’FS ‘ ”
(By Sri Naveen, Advocate for R1)
This Writ Petition is fiied tmdgr 226% aim
227 of the Constitution ef Inéia ppaymg’ quash the
order dated 13.2.2007, passed by __ti’3e Civil
Judge (JIXDI1) and JIs€iF’~’L73_, at Ma11giya”«i11V_OS.’;Nz).187/03,
rejecting the IA-6 the §_petiti<31:1er"1.–:_ra(ier order I
Ruie 10 R/W. 151, "of-'the (Jade of Civil
Procedure, 190 1::1.1<ier;»'«_VAImexure¢A',"t' as; iilegal and not
sustainabie
em for Preliminaxy Hearing in
'B' gbtip thiS=day',' made the fol3owing:«~
_____ QRDER
' _ jefequest of both the counseis the matter is
At t fmal disposaji.
The petitionefs applicafioe flied under Order 1
“riixie 10 1″/W Section 151 of CPC mine to be rejected.
‘T Hence, the present petition.
<3?/C"
….3..
3. Sri (}.M.AnaI1da, learned counsel appeajfing for
the petitioner contends that the trial
an error in regoctjng the said
interference is called for.
4. Sri Naveen, lcarneé “ttot1n$e}oV.’éi’5;’.gj€:aI’ii’;g~,tfd1″L’
rosgondent No.1 submits and
house has no petition is
co.nccme:cl. served has
V ~ to ,.A
while considering the
apglicstioti oonclusio.n that 13:16 nature of
__wi1′}”i3’ha:1;ge if the said application is allowed.
‘ that gonad rejected the said application.
.’ ‘Silo recorded by ‘t}:1e trial Court rejecting’ the
said rapptication is unsustainabie and requires to be set
V’ sstds for tho foilowing reasons-
1) The applicant claims to have received the
schedule property by Way of gift fi*om the p1aintifi’ during
\<fl:-**"
-4-
the pendeney of the suit. Therefore, the pefitiener
prime faeie would atieast have a sem¥:)1a11ee~ef so
far as the seheduie property is The»
impleadment of the petitiofiger I.
necessary for the just and $2313} e
2) The petitioner is :a property
and claims a. VA of ‘me gift deed.
The said issuee wo:u1.:i»:.1~;e.Ve into by the trial
Court Prime faeie Yam
of the plaintiff has a legal right
to estebliell, ‘just and necessary party for the
udicatioii ‘ef 1:11;: V suit.
T. itige aforesaid reasons, the . order dated
§’ ‘ vide A1mexu;re~A passed by the learned
Prfiieipai Civi1Judge(Jum’or Division) e JMFC, Mandya,
0.S.No.187/2003 is hereby set aside. I.A.No.VI is
hereby aliowed.
V”/<'""
The Writ petition is dissposed off acc0rding1y.g~~—-” ‘
rsk
.¢ua¢5j [:M%’