-1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT 3A1I'QALORE pawn THIS mm 23:: my 05' smpmunnn BEFORE mm rrorrnm MR.JU8"l'ICE 3.9. raifm A If BETWE H: Kempaiah, S / o. Balaiah, Aged about 60 years, .__ Occ: Agriculturists, ~ RI O.By1asandI'a, Gulur I-Ioblif' Tumkur Taluk 8% D_is1:;~ict. M = (By Sri.G.A. if; AND: .----.-----u----.. 1.
Ga11gé.:i_ah,=–
S/o.Ba1aiah_, —
Aged about 60 yé:=1r§;. .
2.
.v s[_§_’3&3aiah’ _____
3. M 3
S/o:B.a1ai.a11T_.
Major, ‘ -.
‘¢’\11ar:¢;:’z*é;Sidents of
2 * Bymsandra Village,
V<';a,~.=_1~.m~ Hobli, Tumkm' Taluk.
V ;E'sxi.M.N.Madhusudan, Adv. for F.'-1
KR-2 65 R-3 are served)
wan' !'E'I'!'I'I01! xe.1o's5*r air Q03' _ 19° jg-c:$<:;VV '
RESPOHDEHTS
This Writ Petition is fled under Arficles 226 Gas 227 of the
Constituticn of India praying to quash the impugned order
.. 2 ..
dated 31.07.2006 passed by the learned 1″ Add}. Civil Judge
{Jr.Dn.), at Tumkur on LA. filed under Section ISI of theCiviI
Procedure Code in 0.S.No.148/2004, vridc A1mcxum–D and etc.
This Petition coming on for orders this day,
made the following:-
QRDER
01. The challcnge in this writ petition’ .
31.07.2006 passed by the Court below
fihad by the 1»: defendant ttodey
permission to me the written sta_tcvfi1e_n’t._._»
02. It is seen fiom the that the defendant
appeared on ttaatt xgtosted for fling the
written:st2ite’m..ént “23;o’3.~2ooé;t;””‘As the defendant did not file
the written”statefiietit,MVfi1o:m,otter was adjourned to 03.08.2004.
On statament was filed, it was
v aisgfi zyritteA1i”:-fiatement not filed. Subsequently, on
defendant filed the application seeldng
pézwriiésioixto the Written statement explaining the mason
‘owhy statement was not filed earficr. This application
x V’ “..ffwAAaétobjeoted. The Court below has passed the impumed ozdsr
‘ the request.
03. A perusal of the impugned order shows that there is no
application of mind by the Court below to the contents of the
1%
_ 3 …
afidavit filed. The Court below has not even discussed the
extent of delay in filing the written statement and as Vtos»33si”nether
the cause shown by the defendant was sufficient for’
for exercising the discretioza.
04. On perusal of the materials Rizal
tvritten statement is filed of from the
date the defendant appealed fhfi the
Written statement is not” toefiod of 30 days as
stipulated in the ct’ treason assigned by
the defendarttitt that he was entitled
for conciortatiefl eelow has comnfitted an
appazetii-,t_ the request without assigning
any reasoaza. the order under challenge
desertges to be is set’ aside.
V ‘.68 lt~1c>E’§;§?¢¢*V:erLe’.\as petition is filed belatedly, counsel for
t§¢v.ae;es;;;$;;::¢§,tf-toss right and justified in contending that the
pefifigner’ eaiiaot get away with a favourabie order without
“paying costs in the matter. In the circumstances, I am
A ji.'(1.e}:ined to allew this Writ petition, subject to the payment of
_Q<-fits of Rs. 1,009] – to the respondezets herein.
.. 4 …
()6. Accordingly, writ petition is aflowed. The ondcr under
challenge is set aside. The Court below is; directed to the
Written statement filed by the petitioner. It “te
observe that the Court below shall ” _
dispose of the case as expeditiouslyias poeésjiauie. “: 4′ ‘
Iudqe
PKS