High Court Karnataka High Court

Munirajappa vs Chikkamuniyappa on 17 June, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Munirajappa vs Chikkamuniyappa on 17 June, 2009
Author: H N Das
IN THE HIGH comm 0? KARNATAKA, BANcég=*§:_oi:~g:é?%}%'%  

swan THIS THE 17?" DAY_QE,3_£!NE'2_'Gi4}§'.';V»    

BEFORE é     H  
mg HOIWBLE MR.JUSTIC§£V_lf£";-!$gl.i'Gf¥€§:.€®'iC3§f!i?§.:l§  

WRIT ¥>ETIT§ON :xso:_; 5733-1:Sj';315;2ao9%(G:»e:»¢cp%.*)

BETWEEN:-
Murx:£Pua;JA:v?.,:a. % 
S/O.LATE TF§IPP§5;:$1VA'~{fijx«KA-   
AGED" As<fm1f."5,5"YEAR§.i1;--- "  
RfO.8AVAI%iAH;'5;%;.;!_IV\i'Z,¥.;LéX§E  
§v§""§133i'I'T3r."E'i§AVl'3»$fi§$fiEEP M K, fi\BVs.,)

     %%%%% 

i  £'H;KKA}M$Ni3'?%pPA
" As;*t3%..LATs%%%APs§AHApPA
A559 ALa;<3:;§"§* 65 YEARS

  A  fflUNE~KE§;ISHNAPPA

.  S;'Q.LA"'I"E APPAIAH
 A§5E*§§} A808? 59 YEARS

   ?:;::=~:A:x:mz,ewA @ cz~:A:~:DaANAYAKA

 '  5:2/G.APPAIAHféAYfi:KA
SEGED ABQUT 30 YEARS

r7L'~'''''V

'\ ,,/



2. At the time of final arguments, pel:iti§e.._eVr:.A.fi~led 

application I.A.¥~lo.6 under Order 6  re" 

péaint, I.A.No.7 under Order 18 ?.i_Il_e 1?4'€Al5'C. to rersizelri t:he"3A:.a"§':=.e"'wey

and I.A.No.8 under Sec.1S1 CPC"Vto::'ra¢ail pm :.'ianVr:i;§I.Vll1;.N0.9
under Order 7 Rule 14---A CiZl?'€~.'.§to  Under
the impugned crrder,  vAA.',j'V_rej.ected all the
aPi3lications. Hen§€'A?ih«:i'3 writ  V

3' Thé filing I.A.No.6

is to deiete.,en--e' ifefié.cf:tl3.e"'pél.e'int'xheduée and to include in its

place anot§1er"'ep;rcpVertya[ ether three applications are in

4¢9nnectl€lh'Vw~ith thVe"pVre_pos::eé amendment. It is net in dispute

'Ath__a£' tiiu-*:li:se eir§;;iir;eii§o;ns are filed at the time of finai arguments.

 If tiiearéséendment is afiowed, it will ameunt to de---

 rneve trial.  is impermissible in iaw. By rejecting the

';§r§3;§Gaed.A arriencimerrt, petitioner is net barred to work nut his

  iii respect ex' the property now sought to be included in

 tli;é""$fiit. Therefore, my prejueice has been caused to the

 feetitierzer under the impugned order. I find no justifiable

greased to interfere with the imeugned order. Accerdingly the

/W"
'aw



writ peiition £5 hereby rejected without refe2Pr§r1t;jeV_~.:V1V:'c':'_ 

respondents.   

dh*

n $ _