High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt K R Sowmya (Vishala) vs Smt K S Vasavamba on 11 November, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Smt K R Sowmya (Vishala) vs Smt K S Vasavamba on 11 November, 2008
Author: A.S.Bopanna
E

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALGR_E "'- _

DATED THIS THE 1 1th DAY OF NovEM3E12--§5és'--'  * 

BEFORE

THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICEA:3\BOPAiVWA  

WRIT PETFTIGN NO.1fl9?_Q/2(§G3 (GM    :1

BETWEEN:

Sm' K RSOWMYA {VISHALA3 
W10 K.N.l?AMESH, -- V V
MAJOR,   

SHIVAJI mo COI,§)B~6Y,   ,     :
BEHED MERCHA£~i_i'i'S   3 ' '  " 
SANTH AMA1A_Pd?£$IEERE 'I'a_w_N",   V
HASSAN D§STF'iC'I'._.-  .   ;

 PETITEONER

(By Sri K.R.w.é;e$:az>RA AS$?S',«..A7DVS.j

 V'     A   ..... .. 9

 1" -.SMT i'csvé»;sAvgMBA

_ . W,'{_)'*i,A'1'E'K,P~;SUNDARRa.JA simrrv
'--..MAaoR;»«._  '
, R[A'{_' vasuwmm LAXMIPURA EXTENS!ON,
"aAR£1._SIK'!.5ii2 573 103.

K $.${}li'ESH man
A r 'sic um: K.P.SUNII3ARRAJA sm:*r'rY
, MAJOR,
 -E2/AT' VASUNDARA LAXMIPURA EXTENSION,
ARASIKER 573 103.

 V :6

~ V'  K s vxsuwmxra

S_/O LATE K.P'.SUN{)ARRA.JA SHETTY
MAJOR,
R/AT VASUNDARE LAXMEPURA EXTENSIOR,

L

'a



ARASIKER 5723 103.
4 K s SANDHYA

Wm K.S. VISHWANATH,  >
MAJOR,   "
R/AT VASUNDARA LAXMIPURA EXTENSION,
ARASIKER 573 103. =  

5 as PRASANNA KUMAR  ' _
s/0 K.P.S{JNDARRAJA__SHET'I'Y'....-- _ 
MAJOR, U    _4 V 
R/AT VASURDARA taxmmuna E2x'FENSl(3N;~ _
A"RASIKER573103. T '   _   '

6 KF-'£?AI)H1KA '  : 
w/eras. Pm:-we.  WJMAR9
R;'AT V£;SUb§£}AR'A-';AXMI;PUBA i§x1*Er--3;$zoN,
ARASIKER 5%z_s;_1<::3.' '    2

 RESPONDEBITS

THIS WHP.' E-'ILED'<.UI'EDER ARTICLES 3226 AN33 227 OF THE
CONSTITUWQN OF Ilk'DIA'--PRAYH§G"i'{) QUASH THE IMPUGNEI) ORDER
PASSED BY  CIVIL J1}I3GF_}j' (SR.DVN'} IN RJLNO. 34/2008 ON
I.A.NO.1_DT. 11.44.2008'!-iNNEX--G ONLY IN RESPECT OF DEPOSIT OF

MONFELY ;2§«:Nr.

. "Petition cmmn' g on for pmIum' "nary l1earu1' g,

 -.t3m.s'éiay,"£1:it:  made the following :

ORDER

K.R.Naga11dra, learned counsel ibr the

pcmscfl the writ papers.

2. The pctiiiener herein was the dcficndant in

&O.S.No.S()/€34. The said suit came to be deemed by

L

C’:

judgment and decree dated 19.3.2008. The J

claiming to be aggricvcd by the

has filed an appeal lilldtfl’

registered as RA No.34/08. In
had 3130 filed an applicaziexg h1§}1ti#14 ’41 ‘fiulc 5(1)
of CPC seeking stay of and deems
passed in Court while
consiierring gantcd the stay
howevcriifghe the appcflzmt shall
deposit within one week and also

contilluc toésfitxagcs at the rate of Rs.460/ – per

1:e::o11t?1§giili’~tI;:e the appeal regularly. It is also

the said deposit, the stay would get

The pcfitioncr though has 110

V Vv _ ta the order for dcposit of R:s.20,642/-

um event, then’: is decree to that extent and the

or ethcxwise would uitimatsely be oonsidcmd by

‘ flzcfilower Appciiatc Csurt, the gievancc is with regard to the

%

direction to deposit 123.460] – per month till the ”

the appeal.

3. with zegmd to the disgmfio§§«tp’~1§§ b§–ihe A

Iowtr Appellant Court while bzfler
of stay, the law is well scgtlcd ‘ihat c:xtcnt,
the Court below has no}: insofar as the

ciinzctiorn to deposit’ the ifionth smote’ the

deposit “hefz§1e. and if for any reason
the gjbjoction for the respendents

1:hcrc1n’ to amount, it would still be open

_ for “i;r.a_=:1§gi;3, to putibrth her contentions before

Court as and when the respondents seek

Juthe said’ amount. Therefore, to the sand’

V . I”?ib’:i;:;t see any mama to illtt3l’f€l’t: with the sand’

this point. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of

the said obsezvations protecting the right: of the

VT ‘petitioner ta object to the withdrawal of the amount as and

” ” when time said issue axixses before the Lcrwer Appcliatc: Court

3

and any order would be passed only

appellant.

With the above. obscitaticnsgx. ”

dispoaed of. No order as to

sd/.}
” = Tudgé