High Court Karnataka High Court

Malikarjun Mahommadsab Nadaf vs Maktumsad Ladjisab Nadaf on 7 July, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Malikarjun Mahommadsab Nadaf vs Maktumsad Ladjisab Nadaf on 7 July, 2009
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
WP No.3"-458./2006

IN THE men mom 0? xannxraxa  %

CIRCISIT BEICCI-I AT DKARWAD

DATE!) THIS mm 7": ms? or  g %% " 

mmna: 

'ran HoN*m.n HR.JI13'!'lCE »na_onAH  "   

   

wart pm':-nos xo.3§sf$**    H 

Between:
Malikaxjun Mahommadsab N1a'da1"*,~"  '
Age:19 years,     ' '
Occ:Agricu1mm,..~._   _,    :
Rio Ghataprabha, % %   'H    
'I'q:c3okak.       

[By  

__A..I.1t.§.: 

" -  Ladji§ébv--§%ada£

Rjo«.TNané.a'gaon;%~K}1anapur,
Tqifiokak, Di;sg*ae1gaum.  nmsroacnsm

'fly  Z  l!.Kn!km'n1.Adv)

  A  petitian is filed under Articles 226 and 227 ef

 _t3.1t:.._(}o11stitutlon of India praying to set aside the order

-   by the.Add1. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) Gokak at Gokak

 T   i3:}.7I.A.N0.19 and 26 in O.S.N(). 142/ 1996 dt:.16.2.2€306 as
V  marked as Axmextlm-«E and etc.,



WP No.345§2OG6

This petition coming on for preliminary hearixiage
group, this day, the Court made the following:    .,

ORDER

1. The respondent–pIaintifl’ mea suit

and injunction in O.S.No.142[199$’.befere tfiet’.Adc¥e1.’V

Judge (Jr.{)n.), Gokak.

2. Petitioner is the def.-efldatnt suit. He was
represented by No.1 was a
minor at fil’in_ .91′ -the V Defendant No.1
Thereafter, his mother

filed a meet he has attained majority and

defetidzmt No.1 was prosecuting the suit an

the evidence of both the parties,

the down fer arguments. Thereafter, the

ef the plaintifi’ is already over. Now the matter

‘ for hearing the arguments of defendant At that

‘. the application is filed praying for amendment of

iwritten statement. The copy of the application for

amendment is produced at A;tmexure-C to the writ petition

M

‘NP N0.34S8:’20G6

by the said proposed amendment. The defendagit’ %

reopen the entire suit. Such a Mprocedu;~e4.: –« .,

permitted to be adopted. The

attracted to such proceedixlgé ‘The ;

to frivolous litigation. such then
there will be :10 Accorcwlingly, the
trial Court 1312:: for
.fié£1é£2, the petition fails

and ”

Sd/_
JUDGE