Mahantayya S/O Mallayya Hiremath vs Gurushantayya S/O Gurubasayya … on 27 January, 2009

11t_Ej}C..yea3?s, Occi:  - ~ '

(.-}i1fl1}C);TiSii"§'_}fai:A::;'E":r'f'.O  Hirefiwbath
Age: 553' yc§;r*s., Oészrz  '    

.  ..'.jbkiaha§i§t;ayya Hircmath

Age: 50' 3*ea1":s;-Qcc; 'i'»fij§id.i€: School Teacher

Revanasia dayyai"S/ "'ts1a4.1§a;ntayya Himmath
Age: 40 "y-ea'1"$,V €3ctc'=:_ 

o Mahantayya Hiremath

Age':  jnzars, Oce: Kannada School Teacher

" ~RT1'a..Ma;ic§;::.:~,. Tq. Shorapur.

. fa Mahantayya Hiremath,
""«&ge.;"4-4 years, Gcc; Agni

P$fifi§>ner l'\lcas.1 to 4 8:. 6 are

 ' R19 Hirur, Tq: Muddcbihal,
 Bist: Bijapur.

...PE'I'E'I'1ONERS

  u ._  (By Sri Veeresh B.Pati.1, Adv.)

AND:

Gurushantayya S/0 Gmuhasayya Hiremath
Matadadevaru



W.P.No.4€)454/2008

-3-

Age: 73 years, Occ: Religious work,
R/0 Hirur, Tq; Muddebihal,

Dist: Bijapur.  RE$r50§313---§;:§*:§f__ 

(By Sri V.S.Jalde 85 _-- -- '
Sri Mahadev S.Pat;i1, Advs.)    A 

This Writ Petifion filed mldgtr " 2227 'tg§rt. '£z1¢

Constituirion of India prayiV11'g__to qtia-._sh the timpuvgned; oxfief u

dated 11.9.2008 passed b3z_ 'tE_1e Civil v.1;uige"'~.1(Sr;':§n.) at
Mucidebihal on i.A.No.HE in 037125/20O'F. asat Ajnnexure»-D
etc. ..    

This Wxit Pctiticumttt ivofifbr fircfiminary hearing

in "B" group, this day, the imarzie fbflowing:

This writ.  a¢r§:;da;;ts is directed
against  ''''  11.09.2003
(Annexuwij;  court -- the Court of
the Civi};»JLA1.ciga'é§  tiizxucidebihal rejecting the
  by defendant No.4 under

  'W Section 151 of the CPC to set

tttV%t%ttttas:c1e its.. orgier-.tA«:dé1ted 13.12.2007 and to pezmit the

' W '_''£'i{é§é3i:da::;ts tosf1Ie their written statement in the suit in

u"-ftifo;g§N<§;:2.372oo7.

WW. W M.mn..w. ruurrr uuulu ,.-\J,_3' mmnmm mun court? or KARNATAKA HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA 1-«mu COURT or: KARNATAKA man cous



........... .... I\l'lI\lIal"'ll!"'ll\I'|'- nu-wn ...-vu.m..g;- nnlmtnlnnn - ruum uuum -ur--mmAmxA- H:6H"'COURT"OF :€ARNA1"ARA" H'IGH' eeuar er KAWATAKA men hot};

%%  F com.

w.P.No.4e454/2008

-3-

2. I have heard the learned course} appearing  

the parties and perused the impugned orcler»    '

AI1nexure--D.

3. The app1ic:21tion--I.A.No.3 was    

file written statement after the." j4e§id_enoe 

closed and when the suit   
evidence. The trial    Iof the
matter, has foxxrj-Le'    was
offered by  the delay in

filing the wI'ittenV  V " ~~ ., " ' « "

4.  havei. 'e-t,1)e___ématter in the light of the

priiieip1ee*»1ajid. the Henfbie Supreme Court in

  cmxnm RA! (Am 2003 ac
 Vrelatiung Vie eeercise of jurisdicuion under Articles
   «of Vibe Constitution of India pertafming ta

2 2 A   orders passed by Cams subordinate to





LUUKI Ur IKAKNAIAKA rm.-it-1 CUURAAI-C3_F KARNATAKA I-HGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HiG£-i COUE

W.P.No.404S4{2008

-4-

5. In my opinion, the impugned   _

suffer from any error of jurisdiefion or   = 

on the face of the record to waV1fI'anteii1terfereneeV:funtE:er

the extraordinaxjy jurisdietiqn Vei"-'.. 'this =

Article 227 of the   ~   l

6. The respondent/' is  to withdraw

the aIIi01]I1t;’Of the petitioners
pursuanffo 1’7 . 10. 2008.

I UD GE