High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt. Bhimabai W/O Hanamant … vs Smt. Awwamma W/O Baswantappa … on 16 June, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Smt. Bhimabai W/O Hanamant … vs Smt. Awwamma W/O Baswantappa … on 16 June, 2009
Author: B.S.Patil
EN THE HKEH 5:01:12? OF KARNATAKA &
C§ER{.1UiT 82«:Nc§~i AT' GULBARGA  

DATE?) Tms; THE 16"' DAY 0:5 §AJ"U'NE',  299:5;  _:' 
BEFORE   :  : '» A

THE H€}§¥'BLE MR.J:3SP::§f:;3B.é.';?.aj*iLV   

WRET PE'fI'¥'I'£{)N N0. ;--8.189Q,.€:i1..:2;0Q'9F.gGM-«CPVQ; 

§3hi:::;¢1hai W/0    

Age: 48 years, Occg .H'm_1s§§1_¢)1d,  _  
171/ 0 Alhahaefi, Ti}: E§:i}a1;>ifi7'«".  ' . '

.'. Petitioner

{By Smi. Hema  E?-:1, Adigfi-CélAif§)! 

£»;£'.*:'2a

L  .W','.Q Saswantappa Katnalli,
Age.;_ 6 L K (ice: _ Ijiousehokci,
R/0 Afiiabati,' Tq, Sgbist: Bijapur.

 Téiié  €L§fi'i<:'er 0fNagat}1anw£3,

 «Z.i?"... {3on$1:i1;ué:ncy 8:£japurTa1uk~<i:t1[m

 V' 'A5;sistz+n1t Ckimmissioner, Bijapsur.

 Respondents

  '§'--}:.*:is Petition is flied under Articles 226 and 22'? of the

 ' Qgtistituiion 01' igudia prayixzg ta quash the erder in MKA. N9. 1 1/09
.V "on "(£13 file of the Prl. Dist. Judgs, Bijapur at A1m--G in the intemst
 Qfiusfice.

This p€:~tii:i{;'n tzsming on far preliminary hearing this day, '(ha
("I-c2111': made: the f0}1GW.i:r1g;



ORDER

Petitioner is aggxieveci by the OI'(i€I§AaéifIL’Fi

01.05.2039 passeci by the {Add}. cm; ..1ud 7fg¢ Dn;.) _*BAijap:u.1n’ ”

by me P11 Disnict Judge, Bijapur msp§§fi.iye1y.” V

2. in an «election p€’iI§tiQ;%:l..”‘f~11€(fi:A[.!12!)’§!?:A gsmm in
Election Petition N0’ V8/06 fzled an
appiicatien requesting hear the matter
(:11 the :f;Lt2§ :»€m2£intai:1abi1ity 0f the
election petiti§:1ié”7a?$ th:-3 tribunal had not
cmnplitzd with vfhfi ‘HIE petition under his
signature: and tha{ tiaéieposit .3 sum of Rs. 2,000] ~ as

sezzgzrity f<3 :"~3'.{:€1;i§:E0;1.~ ” ~

3. Th:j4jV}ea1:1:’§é’E’..–if:iviI Judge has allowed the said appfication

hafi calieii jipsn the parties to address on the prgliminary

the maintainability of the eiezctien petition.

‘A by the same the pstiiiigner herein 1i}I’€f€I’1’6d

1 f\rIiS{?_u€}§}8H€0u3 fiappeai N0. 11 [O9 beforr: the Pr}. District Jtidge,

“B.,=<;%;.pur, By Ordfii" daied 03.06.2009 the appea; is dismissed.

Aggrieveé by me same the preseni Wm}: paetitien is filed"

1:'

4. Leiarneci Counsei for {ht pefitionfir contends t1}.$§§%; thefé:’

:10 Head to flame any prelimizmly issué to_, p€$i11i;aé’–

uzzciex’ Oréer 14 Rule 2 CPC preiirninarjz

Where: question ofjuriscliction of th€ c_6’uxjt or B3; uS1m;ii?ZVV;’tTE:fi(§it’i;{“‘V’¢?i}:1:§f ”

iaw is Z’l1’iVO1V€\’3; As neither of Q16 tw(}V_€;:ujéstiO:1’s involvéd in the
instant casé, 1:316 matter ou g}’;; fizz} finally and
dispcsed of pa1’ticu1arly.b¢cau;=;e issued by this
court earlier in writ early éisposai of

the dispute, is the gab-m’§s3io:i 131§9;ti£:; ‘

§

3. It is égefl that the court beiow
has framed §é:.;¥$suéV.g;£Sga1ding the bar is maintain the:
elgcfiion m*!iV§ti{:-:21 Wit1:§{:-fit. Vppgizsentation of thfi petition undcr the

sigi1attife« tfie«pcfi.fio_21er and Wifinout éeposifing Rs. 2,QO}0/»– as

, .fi5r.Vco$§’1:§§_”‘%~ — __ E; V

.V 5, ;a.§”;:g }i’t :gai ‘gar far entertaining the petiticm itself is taken

4. 1:-ou4_rts ¥i:e1ow were right ané justified in {mating 2111:: issué

pgfilifiinfity issue and in caflizlg upon the part:i&*.3 ii) address

. _ t1’1¢:-i_;9V’eIrgi1:1:;e11ts an the same. No exception: can be taken ta this

adczrptazi by the learned Civil Juaige’ At any rata, £13

€X€I’€3iSf’: of the Writ jurissditmian, this caurt Wiil not 136 justified in

ixtifirferting with 5;1J;<"::];: Gtfiars.

5' "

XI
.2

7. Hewever, it is necessary to obscrve that tlfze v CZ§,vi;i~—- =

Jutige shali make all endeavcars to dispo.s6__0f ‘

fmrthwith and also the main petition itscif –‘ex1.~gdit_ic~.;§,1};+–..

possible as there is akeady a dimcti0;{1_ ‘X1=:$z«:»m<:1.

Subject to the above' -%:b.s€:rv:aifio1i;_S; t;fi¢ W1;itV"'*;::e"tVi{:ion is

iiisaizissxect

Si/w
JUDGE

swk