-3-
Lflfii, T§L¥Kfi EUNFUND
DESTRICT:BRGREKOT
2. MfS.GEM G?%NITES COM?AEY LT$.;'
: 1Y5 ?AR?NERS .~~'*
R.v§aRAmAN: *W-
$.R.ANVAT£MBE ] . 7}
?.?.§G$DANfiRVA§f V
wzw+~;p
ALL £33 REG HQGBI A?Aé?MaNéS,
VASANTHANAGAR, BfiNGAL0R§956G $~
ff!
,"i\'> '
3. GQVERNMBN?'Q§;KARNg?AKg =_
RE? BY THE S?EQERLP$£PUTE '
¢@MM13s1oNaR,_E§JA§uR'*,=4.~
4'aA§$NAHALL:, A3v., $03 R»l;
A331 GGH$,ASSQCIAfES, RD¥S., €03 R-2;
~?SRI'K.B.A§E@§$K, AQR €03 R~3 & é}
._=Ta:$, MFA IS 33325 uwfiga ORGER 43 RULE
' ,:rnjga5 avg? £93 A"AEN8T THE BRBER fi%TE$
' I
' 26.9}?QO3 PRSSE§
N MISC.RPPLIC%TIGR
$UBfiE {SR.§N), BRQRLKQT, REJECTZNG Tfifi
£PPLiCATEGN FIQEQ BY THE APPELLANT HEREEN UMBER
~x"*®Ra§R 33 RULE 1 C§C ?O DECLARE aim as
=,§Aw§aR/zmnzggmw PERSON.
T%E$ R??ERL $OMING SN ?GR BEARENG TEES BRY,
MRNJUNRTH 3., UELIVEREB THE FOLLO%ING:*
'~_;azxi%=,in_ E%.S.?&3.2
.3-
JEDGMEFT
1 "
The appeliant has Chéliéngec_:né"i§§alit$
and cgrrectness of ihe, ©:der'gpé$sed3*hyg the
Principal Civil Judgé :sr;§nq;:'3aga:kot, in
MiscellaneouaV"x%ppliéati3firfl wo;:13X:999 dated
y j2f<; f$§ afi$#e_ap§§ication was filed by the
a§§e§iafifi Eefé£fim@£der Qrder 33 Ruie 3. of CPC
requégtén§'fi&§'C§urt to permit him to ifistitute
yhe sfiit a$ éh indigent person. @he 331: is
-ifiged by fiim Seeking §0SS€SSiGU of Séé acres oi
Q
3/28/1
and otherT gurvay
7 nu&$é§a } situated in Baiaxamdi village of
Vfiufigunfi fialuk on the ground thafi the afaresaifi
pfcfierty is 3 joint fiamily prcgezty of him and
V°Qthe: &ember5 of ihe family and tfiat cue
‘Q'”Ra%aChan@:a§pa, tha uncle of the giaintiff has
H3
gi ted the said gropexty in ;avQfir O;
reapcndent $0.1 wsociety in the yea§W;§fi§’gfid
therefere, the suit is filed $eeking po$éessi©n.E
0:’: the greund that the giig dsyev-:;3.–3 ‘b’:.nr;s.§,ng
on him.
3. ;a_1:hough”‘«-tine “.1;;::e;;j:,;;*:~1:::m¥g”~%gs filed under
Order 33 Rule ilw-gfV=QEd; iéépondemt No.1
c0nteste§,£hef$ui€«$nVthég@fc&hd that there is
as causé*Qf_a§fii¢n for fihe suit and requested
the Cduru to fl§$fii$§mEhe yatition.
‘Q; afhe trial Court, afte: ccn$idering the
‘7_égidé®;é lfit in by tha parties, heid that theré
:s_ no_.¢§gé@ of action far the appelkant and
V<.thatWthe aileged cause sf actian is alga barred
u"_hy limitation. Accardingiy, the petition aame
39 be rejected. Challenging the same, ihe
pxesefit aypeal is filed.
(“V
-5″
5. The learned counsel for th§ gfifiellanfi
‘E
Mr.Ba§akrishna Sbastry, COfi§EfidS that tfie Kfiiaifi’
Court has committed 3″; sérious “_érr$k_ fin
dismissing the petiti5§m_§1}éd mafia: *G:dé: 33
Rule 1 0f CFC withou€_génsifie:ing fin? same on
mfirits. Accardiag fifi him, wfiether the:@ is a
Cause of actéén f@r”%5e gait or fi@t is a matteg
to be adjmflic%tadvb?*:he–$ou:t after Canducting
‘a regQiar §:ri$1;”g”@hefiéf¢re, he requests tha
C9urt’t5 set aé3d& thé impugned order and allow
the appeal.”
r ,3:
‘* V0,’ ‘?éf_ conira, the Eearned counsel gar
thég5e£fi@§dehts submit that ihe trial Court w&5
— jusfiifie@ in fiismissing the patitismé sinca
J
‘u:éaye is mg gauge 3% action far the suit. it
.f,i3’ai3o contémded by than that the pzoperty is
h®w taken over by the fioveznment and that the