High Court Karnataka High Court

Madhavrao S/O Nagshetty Biradar vs Tippareddy S/O Veer Reddy on 9 February, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Madhavrao S/O Nagshetty Biradar vs Tippareddy S/O Veer Reddy on 9 February, 2010
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
  TIPPAREEDE .... 

 2. "GANIJATI~I1:IA0

IN 'I'HE HIGH COURT 0}? KARNATAKA 
CIRCUIT BENCH ATGULBARGA . §_  _
DATED THIS THE 09*"! DAY OF FE3BRU_A;R'Y"--.'2Q1_O:_.V  _
BEFORE u T T'
HO1\?'BLE MRJUSTICE MOHAN $HAN'I'ANAGGi3I)A:2A'
w.E.I\Io.4I080/2,008'"(GM-cI>rI;)%    E V
BETWEEN:  % AT ''  

MADHAVRAO  ~  =
5/0 NAGSHETTY BIRADAR
AGE ABOUT 58.YEAI2s;"   . 
occ:      
R/O DHANAGAP;    
AURAI3--B.=i' TQ_;"AU'RAD-'E';.--  'I  , V'
DISTRICT:BID--A1;?I,, 3   '-

 ""  T: "21: .. PETITIOAER

{BY   BI   

AND:

_ S/0 VEER REDDY
  AGE:-ABOUT 50 YEARS.
 ' OCC: AGRICULTURE.
 R/GI{jMA;MDAPUR,
TQ: AURAD, DIST: BIDAR.

1. 3/0 VISHWANATHRAO UEASE
 AGE: MAJOR



 _ A' Ci\V_zi}i.,~JVu'"c1ge  D11:_}___Bida1".

'    coming on for orders this day, the Court

 .1*"3(1;'§'..£i_€3 g: A

IU

OCC: AGRICULTURE.
R/O EIKAMBA .
TQ. AURAD, DIST: BIDAR4

3. BANDEPPA
s/0 NAGAPPA KADAGE
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.
OCC: RETIRED EMPLOYEE  ._ 
R/O BANK COLONY. K.i+3.B. ROA_i:>,..
DESI': BIDAR. V  

4. SHIVAKUMAR  

S/O SINDRAMAPPA KAD  

AGE:1\/IAJOR.  - 
OCC:AGRICULTU.I_{E. _  

R/O AURAD--B. D1sT;;'BI;:1AB;.  V . .

  _  r. A  .; RESPONDENTS

{SR1 VILAS    Aijxx/f i«*c..5VI"ex'R1-;*:3 & 4}
R-2 SERV:EI.).b_~._   ~  *
        
This filed under Articles 226 & 227
of then"Cenet;itL;fi.»<§jn_ 0f: 'E32dia. praying to call for the
records  pending before the Addl.



ORDER

By the impugned order, the Court: belotrfiéhas

rejected the application for amendment of ‘

ground that the evidence is already’*cornrI:)_enoe’d§ ‘4 V’

2. The records reveal

filed a suit for declaratioii ai1d””in3’unct.io1′;».. resfject of

the property in questilori. pelid’e1-my of the
suit, it is alleged that, dienpossessed from
the suit. an application
seeking A

of dispossession, the
plaintiffs deserves to be allowed.

If the’anf1endmver1’t”‘is allowed, the same may lead to

of proeleledings and the petitioner has to file

l’one’_n11o’re”–«sduiti’tmneeessarily by withdrawing the present

suit.

Having regard to the above, the order of thev_(}_0urt
beiow 1’ejeCt.i11g the 3.ppIiCatior3. praying for
Cannot: be sustained and the same is H
aside. Accordingly. the same:’1S”sef;
petition is allowed. Consequentfii,
amendment fiied by the Vpetitdtioner WCsj0u1’t V

below is allowed.