High Court Karnataka High Court

Shri Poornasing vs Shri Ramanjaneya on 23 October, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Shri Poornasing vs Shri Ramanjaneya on 23 October, 2008
Author: A.S.Bopanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATEIZ) THIS THE 23%!) DAY 0? OCFOBER 2003 K 

BEF()RI3}

THE HOAVBLE MR. JUSTICE A S B0PANl§{§~».VV    %

WRIT' PETITIQN NG.225/206$  * V  V

BETWEEN :

1 Sm i~"'0ORN&SIN€3    
3/0 LATE ANANTHA§$_&MS;!N(§-V,   "
AGED ABOUT so YEARS"    V

2 SMT:'VS'f}V§i{Ié*;?13AI.VE:'§. 
w;o.AP00RNASIr§G-.T  
AGEU AE30UT_55..:YEFs~RS' . 

3 SKIP Brigxvazeisxmta 
$.50 monnasrne

 "  _ AGEQABQUT GSTEARS

2:: T'  Sm Pv%§§ag:h:*IfIT1g;r4 IS FILED UNQER ARTICLES 226

 }5sg'22?'~{3F¥"rHE ..«::oNs'm'U'r10N OF INDIA, WITH A PRAYER
'Ta; _Q:;A:«::H'ATHE'vQRDER DATED 13,n.20o'? PASSED on

1.'A%.Nr;.1x~ '*«.€}:S.'N(}~.87/05 3*; THE CIVIL auacm (SR.DN.),

DHA-RwAR'Ar3»:3 'REL. JMFC AT i{.(}.F'., VIDE ANNE)<2URE--A,

Ti1istW1'1;i4Petiti<:r:u eoxnitng on gm Preliminary hearing in

" " ':'Bj"gAmup,  day, the Court: made the foflewing :

J»

'.



ORDER

Heard the learned counsei fbr the palms” :-3 V’

the writ papers.

2. The pctitjonttxs hcmiu if

O.S.Ncv.87/05. In the said ans; ‘tl;}3 ps1:ifisncrs :}:s§re./_V§5iefi

I.A.No.9 under Order 6 Rule 17 a 151 sf cps

praying t_!1sir writtc:-:n statement. A
perusal 0f as per the appficaiion

filcd which is seasabig at’-Afisexum-B to the petition would

that “fhe dsféfidsnts sought to irzcozpomts para

N’e__. opposed the said application and the

trial trgonsidezing the rival contentions has come

~ _’t’:C.-..,the cdnciusion that since tbs said pleading is already

in tins wxtitten statement, the application requires to

‘rejected, more particularly, when based on such

V pkadings already issues have {men framed in the”: suit.

A

m
at

S

and since the plaintifi” is bcfbzm the Court below

decree of specific performance, it is ultinzately A’

pIajintifi’ to csisablish his case. Thegreforc, the 3 b

that the suit for specific perfolnlancgt J

nwd not be incorporated by way améfidfixcnt. ” ”
Keeping all these aspects I 5.-:t__1 =c2f_i:.h:c

that the onim” dated 13.1A1.,2o07Awi.r.«:;§g;::ag.g:;md as péfifion

does not ‘ Aeairxdmgly, the petition
stands <3-;','v:1+1crV__'.as5 to costs.

% Sd/'_
%.%- %%%%% Judge

5, ®v