IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 27% DAY or N0VEMBER.,§'_:§091$V:~----: ii
BEFORE
THE HON"BLE MR. JUSFICE 4'
WRIT PE'I'I'I'ION NO.3.1399/ii3Q'8(GM~€'»F'&.}¥}A.
Eflflfifl;
SURENDRA D. SHE'???
AGE 50,000: BUSINESS, .. «
12/0 2:» caoss Maaammgsgra, ' . A .
NEAR WATER TANK, .'3AVI§._DATI"i..:§£€I}AD',-- .~
DHARWAD. ' A
(BY SR1 SHRIf{AN.fT"1'. PA'I"£L."A;fJv.'~--;_.
A112;
2. MOHAMMAD '-- ' "
s/o ABDUL '£AzAK MIJLM
AGE so YEARS, ace: PRIVATE SERVICE,
Rfii} DHARwAn,V.A:r PRESENT WORKING
sAUD:_--ARABIA, RE?*"F"BY ms
«spa mpnazz,
1A: K-aixaaém. n1\£V..A'.I»$I;3L1A,
AGE 55' YEARS, (zscc: PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/0 .1AYA,NAG&.R, nmnwm.
SR1 smeavva KUDIAYYA GANACAHARI,
' AGE 43, OCC: PROPRIETOR,
V. BASAVESHWAR KHANAVALI,
« . 210-' 01,0 DALAL STREET,
'FVEGETABLE MARKET, NEAR REGKL CIRCLE,
QHARWAD.
" ALABAX DADASAB BAGALKOT,
AGE 45, once: pnopazmme
as/s HOTEL arsmma,
R/0 01.12) DAIAL swam', .
VEGETABLE MARKET, NEAR REGAL CIRCLE, 'SK/.
DHARWAD. .. RESPONDENTS
(BY SR1 K.L.PATIL, ADV. FOR CIR-1)
was wan’ PE’I’?1’i0N’ Is FILED UNDER Ai?i’iCLEI8.’22i6. ‘F{K!*5I5
227 OF ‘THE co:~:srmmoN op’ mum PRAYINQ1-mAAQz;As;~:.
orzmzre on I.A.No.V!l m O.S.No.13i/06 D1′. 2:./10193 %a*r..
ANNEXURE -1) on THE mm C>FM’l’HE §i””‘A-Iii_3L}”».Cv3EVlLV ‘V
JUf)GE[JR.DN) DHARWAD. AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PE’1’I’I’ION coumci-.offF’oR[“-PV§EL::sg1§:A§§§7._
HEARING THIS DAY,’I’I-IE couRfr.w.nE=’mE FoL1,:.’m1:§G: %
_ ORDEI§”f __
The petitioner petition
challenging by the trial
Court % (may am permit the
petitio1:.éi9fo’
2, rgspondent-pxamtin’ rm med a suit
“‘~f.’pr was duly served. He
throng: a counsel. He did not file
The Court called upon the plaintifi’
evidence. The plaintifi’ adduced evidence,
. 4′ documents to prove his title which shows that
2 h has purchased the suit mhedule wopexty from
»..¢ .’previous ovwnms. The defemiants without filing written
statement, cross-examined the. plaintiff fully. In fact it
V,
is after all this, an appiicatien is flied for ,*3:fih.e
deiay in fifing the written statement. Lite
pet.iti011er the delay is one yea1f8 Ifieiizfzs 8.-<:":_ei:"'e3.rs fen”-‘;_xr V’meni;”h’S. ,
3. The tria1’e 0*urt .j_m_te«.C0:1side1*e.tionS the
entire material on reeofd, ¢m;Lau;:: jvviiie defendant in
eross–exa111i?i1ifii;g»e’ piégifitifi’ wi”t3im-it. filing {he xzvritten
‘ statement,?%”came¥::§:e the’-eonciueien that the cause shown
(10 11d”£t_ce1jsi”jt1i2:e’ suff_i.eie_r1t or an exceptional cause to
perznit deiléxideiat 1:0 {fie written statement 311:3.
< ae'ei3r(¥._ii1g1}7, it=E1.;r3:s rejected the said appiicatioxl.
L' the 3.3.16} order, the first defendami–
f;e£iiioI§e'1§§i_e jibefore this eeurt.
4. The ieamed eeunsei fer the petitiener
eubmitted the deiay is only one year eight menths. The
appkicatzion may be allowed on terms as the statexnent of
the defendant was not availabie and therefore he
submits the impugned order requires to be quashed.
party. in a case where tha defendazat has acieélisgfiarfiigz’ ~
and wafits ta drag on the p:~0{::-itrdixigté sx%f1′:3i1»V £13; ‘
proceeds 1:0 <:ross~exa.mir1e, it he &Qés~. I:ot».
to file the statement _ I716" .__k;"§'?i<_A the-
consequelzces. He cannot i§)ez*m;.i;tte<i A' written
statement. The af1.1}1y justified in
rejecting su(:}:;._ 'a11 I-i'e:ax<E5e, 11:3 groun{:is.
Dismissed. » _
Iv ... ' :«1,::;;-. " ¢
{ % % Sd/I