{"id":251014,"date":"2010-09-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010"},"modified":"2015-05-05T14:25:39","modified_gmt":"2015-05-05T08:55:39","slug":"u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"U Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
U Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda<\/div>\n
1\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\n\nDATED THIS THE 2\"\" DAY OF SEPTEMBER, \n\nBEFORE\n\nWRIT PETITEON ND,1837\"\"\/201D  \"  \n\nBETWEEN:\n\nU. NAGESH NAYA:<~.._\nS\/D LATE ANANTHA NAY'AK,:;_=\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR. 3USTICE A.N-; 'V'E'E\\lL}'G'.,(")P(A"1.:AA:GDWDA7, A\n\nAGED 55 YEARS, R\/AT. D.ND'.'S'49__--.$_SD79;f1', \n\nMURUGHA MUTT COMPOU N'D,=_\n\nDONGARAKERI, M:ANc_3AEDRE',~..'\n\nD.K. DIs;'rRI;'ri:*r_, , =\n\nSRI SRASRAR  A ' \n\n PJF\u20ac~uSH'DTHAn1A"""'-- "\n\n;\u00a7\\GE_D_AVEsCr',JT[ 55 YEARS, . '\nR,\/AT D.reD.5g9;8a=,7,'=A.__' " __\nMURUGHA MUETT-C_O~MPO"UND,\nDoN'eARAKER1,'MAA:;;ALoRE,\n\n_ \u00ab D. K.DIST_RI'CT".\n\n'  SR1 N'A,RAYAN'A"B \n\nS\/O. LATE, BABU,\n\n  _AG.ED.A30gT 51 YEARS,\n\n , D'.N"D.,..5-9'+w847,\n\nE' ' MURUTHA MUTi' COMPOUND,\n DDNGARAKERI, MANGALORE,\n.D.K_.DISTRICT.\n\nA' '*-.,_SRI v. VASANTHA RAD\n S\/O LATE v. MADHAVA RAD,\n\nAGED 68 YEARS,\nD.NO.5-9-876,\nMURUTHA MUTT COMPOUND,\n\n\n\n "(BY SRI K.SHASHI KIRAN SHETTY, ADV.,\n\nDONGARAKERI, MANGALORE,\nD.K.DISTRICT.\n\nS SRI GOPAL MANJUNATH GAVASKER,\nS\/O LATE MANJUNATH P GAVASKER,\nAGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,\nD.NO.5~9~877,\n\nMURUTHA MUTT COMPOUND,\nDONGARAKERI, MANGALORE,\nD.K.DISTRICT.\n\n(BY SRI VIJAY KRISHNA aHAT,=Apv.)   \nAND: 'V V V\n\n1 SR1 MURUGHA MUTE\n\nCHITRADURGA, "      \n\nREP. BY ITS PONTIFF &,M,A'rAr3HI~RATH;I,__ \n\nSRI-- SRI SH.IvAMu,R-1* HY .MUR!.jGHA. SHARANARU,\nBY HIS RA 'HOLDER MR....KARU'N!\\'I<.AR,f\n\nS\/O LATE R.;--I5ABu MAISTRY,  "\nAGEB'44'$I--'-EARS, '    I \n\nR\/AT DVHANIQAKERI-.H0L;SE'," I\n\nKGI"'C.HA'DI PEJST, "MA'NG\/~\\L"0'RE;\n\u00a3_).K.D_IS'T5RICT?.--V 575098.. _'\n\n2 SHREE SHREE S'l~iIVA_PRAKASH SWAMIYAR,\nV.(_uFATHE'RS NAME NOT KNOWN)\n\n AGED MA3o.R, I\nS21-R. JANGAMA"'SAMATHANA MUTi',\n\nI GURU.PU.RA, MANGALORE TALUK,\n\n _D".K_.'D.IST_ 5574145.\n\n LAXMLMEMORIAL EDUCATION TRUST (R)\n REP'.BY"ITS PRESIDENT\nJANARDHANA SHETTY,\n\u00bb A AGED 55 YEARS,\n'  S\/O.LATE.SANKAPPA SHETTY,\nR\/AT."LAXMI", LOWER BENDORE,\nMANGALORE, D.K.\n\nL21'. _  \n\n RESPONDENTS<\/pre>\n
.Q’.’RI2AETITIoI$iE.RS~_VV<\/p>\n
2. Murugha Mutt the 1st respondent herein has<\/p>\n
filed O.S.26\/06 on the file of Civii Judge <\/p>\n
Mangaiore, in which respondents 2 and__.?3.”a’re–i:__f.’tiE?E\u00a7’,<\/p>\n
defendants. The suit is for the relief of deci’av~rajtio’n~::oftitie”‘V if<\/p>\n
and canceliation of documents and other inrcid~entai”Vre[iei:?s;<\/p>\n
The 2″” respondent herein has..__fiiedV”written s:tat;emVeVnt3 <\/p>\n
has contested the suit. Petitio:V:n”e.ij:3 filed t}.S.26\/06
\nUnder 0 1 R 10 of  of the Court to
\npermit them to corine-down  ‘isuppiementary
\ndefendants   in the suit wiil
\nhave a     705\/o5 filed by them
\nand pendi-_ngA the piaintiff \u00ab- Murugha
\nMutt  in I.A.3, the 2″” defendant<\/p>\n
fiiedicouinter o’n”i?,V9vv.G3AiG6 and opposed the prayer made by<\/p>\n
 the.:petfiti.on.ers in I.A.3. The Triai Court having examined<\/p>\n
f”‘t~he.–.maV’tter;\u00ab._h’a;’s'”Vheid that the petitioners are not necessary<\/p>\n
parties the suit and hence, has dismissed I.A.3. The<\/p>\n
if’T’-iffiiisaird.order has been questioned in this writ petition by the<\/p>\n
.’  a–ppfi’cants in I.A.3.\n<\/p>\n
\\\/,<\/p>\n
3. Sri V.K. Bhat, iearned advocate appearing for<\/p>\n
the petitioners wouid contend that the decisjioun~.i_ in<\/p>\n
O.S.26\/06 wm have a bearing on the suits’.fiiecite.V.’i;:v__”.th_e’<\/p>\n
petitioners i.e., o.s. 607\/05 and 795\/05 .a’ndf};e;riee,’–they <\/p>\n
ought to have been allowed;\n<\/p>\n
supplementary defendants .int4._o.s.’2ia\/Us fiie’dVth.e <\/p>\n
respondent herein. Learned  co.n’ten:dedVv5that, the
\nTrial Court without co–nsid_er’;i_ngVj\u00a7’the\u00bb–_’rna”tter in the correct
\nperspective and by vm–isd_ijrect–ing_ “iitseif’.:v..’5jas passed the<\/p>\n
impugned order  ir..r’atio..nai.”‘
\n4’.”   Kira_’n””SVhetty, learned advocate
\nappearvingii for thQ’V”g\ufb01V\u00a7i\u00bb.re\u00a7.ppndent, invited my attention to<\/p>\n
the staterne-nt”of_nbject’i*o’ins filed to I.A.3 on 29.6.06 and<\/p>\n
~”t~.,,_Aco;.:ite~ng,_-1.gd…_ that.”‘*~there is a coliusion between the<\/p>\n
pet.ition’e:_rssandjtthe 15* respondent herein, to defeat the<\/p>\n
 of_ithe_ 21″” respondent and hence, the prayer in I.A.3<\/p>\n
‘x__has b~ee’r: rightiy rejected by the Triai Court. Learned<\/p>\n
A ‘*:.”‘cottn’se! submitted that, no reiief having been sought<\/p>\n
 against the petitioners herein in the suit filed by the 15″<\/p>\n
I<\/p>\n
respondent, petitioners are not necessary parties. _I___t was<\/p>\n
pointed out that, unless the petitioners are held.i:’to:”‘–be<\/p>\n
necessary parties, the prayer in I.A.3 being m’i;SCQ\ufb02VCT\u00e9’i\\(gTd.ii””<\/p>\n
has rightiy been rejected. Learned .c.oiinse’l it<\/p>\n
the petitioners are at liberty to p’rose_cu’te <\/p>\n
05. 607\/05 and 705\/o5 in ‘ac:CQrdanAce\ufb02with’la’\\ili.,;'”t.ea;rnedVi’<\/p>\n
counsei made submissions iny_.si1:’ppo”rtg’ of.’the…finyd\u00a7ings and<\/p>\n
conclusion of the Triai Ccidrt   order.\n<\/p>\n
5.  on both
\nsides andi’V”l’-papers, the point for
\nconsid:era”t’ion’:isv:ail’; 3 V i it I<\/p>\n
“lswiiethei;iVihgsV_i’rii_ai ocredit is justified in dismissing<\/p>\n
 pertyislal of the plaint in O.S.26\/G6 as at<\/p>\n
  indicate that the suit is for deciaration<\/p>\n
tha’t…thev’plai~ntiff is the owner of schedule ‘A’ property and<\/p>\n
Ki”-..VVV”‘forgthlewrelief of directing the defendants to hand over<\/p>\n
  possession of the plaint scheduie property and symbolic<\/p>\n
possession of the building situated in item 1 of the<\/p>\n
‘>4<\/p>\n
property and on their failure, to recover possession<\/p>\n
through the process of the Court. There are furthe.rVprayers<\/p>\n
for declaration that the registered documentsw’are’,j’,*to’ <\/p>\n
declared as null and void and unenforceable”iv*n.:ji_a,W’~iar’;d for”<\/p>\n
cancellation etc.<\/p>\n
7. The case of theViJ’lFi,,’fi’tiQneArs in   and’<\/p>\n
705\/05 is that they arein po&ss*es.s:i’on’*-a_nd enjo-yment of the
\nsuit properties and  -be disturbed by
\nthe 2″” respondeint  hence, the 2″”\n<\/p>\n
respondent  restrained by isue
\nof decree’  iriJA’uLl”Vn’Ct’i\u00a7on. The case of the
\npetitioners asl ,.o..s. 607\/05 and 705\/05 is<\/p>\n
distinct andse’para–te\u00b0t_hariVthe one which has been putforth<\/p>\n
 ..respo’n’dvent’ herein in 0.8.26\/2006, Apparently,<\/p>\n
 by the petitioners herein in their said<\/p>\n
suitsihcanAn’ot._g;nb hand in hand with the prayer made by the<\/p>\n
‘a__1*\u00b0” respondwent herein in O.S.26\/2006. The claim made by<\/p>\n
A Cfthel””2″d respondent that, there -is collusion between the<\/p>\n
 petitioners and the IS” respondent to defeat its rights,<\/p>\n
K\/7<\/p>\n
\/<\/p>\n
prima facie appears to be justified. No person can come<\/p>\n
on record as a suppiementary defendant to suppo-rtthe<\/p>\n
case of the piaintiff and that too when a<\/p>\n
separate reiief has been sought by fiiing sepairate :suits,V if  <\/p>\n
8. By virtue of Order 1 <\/p>\n
has the power to add a party,.:b~u%t the .<:__ondgiftivonfprecedentV' C<\/p>\n
is that the Court must 3;? satis~f\u00a7ed_:'th'at.'the \ufb01pre.se.ii\u00a7ce of the
\nparty to be added  order to enable
\nthe Court to .ve'fffectuai:iy";a'ri;\u00a21 V\u00a2O,}fa_piete'i;yVV'"'adjudicate upon
\nand settie aii   themsuit. The Court has
\ndiscreti'on'f' upon the facts and
\ncircumstances  if on account of impieading<\/p>\n
there__were~ to._'.beA'=. protraction or inconvenience or<\/p>\n
b.effect"to"'the party on record, the prayer for<\/p>\n
  in1pi'ead'ing -ca.nr'rot be aiiowed.\n<\/p>\n
  -In view of the above and since no reiief has<\/p>\n
J’b.een sought against the petitioners in O.S.26\/G6 fiied by<\/p>\n
  13* respondent herein and considering the nature of<\/p>\n
  -prayer in the said suit which is only against the 2″” and 3”<\/p>\n
ix<\/p>\n
respondents, the petitioners are not necessary parties.<\/p>\n
Prayer in I.A.3 has been correctiy considered ajr:=d:’f”th’ere<\/p>\n
being no merit, has rightly been rejected_.,4″ii–yi\u00e9tyhejkriacii<\/p>\n
Court. There is neither any i_r,rat.i_onai.ityiV”‘hrj’;\u00a2\u00bb Viiie4’_g;a|i”c.yuu<\/p>\n
” committed by the Trial Court in the rraatter ‘or <\/p>\n
of I.A.3 and in passing the iinpn-..gnedA’order,’   <\/p>\n
In the resuit,   shail stand<\/p>\n
dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
  the observations
\nmade   of consideration of
\nprayeir:vVma_deA’Vins >and”‘-s_ha||.’not construed as expression
\nof opinionon  of either of the parties in<\/p>\n
O.S.\u00a7607.\/O5 and”705’v\/”O5, The petitioners are entitied to<\/p>\n
i””prosect\u00a7’te the said suits in accordance with law. The<\/p>\n
 “~ji,\u00a7::lgrnentaV_nVd.’VV-decree passed in O.S.26\/O6 if any, shali not<\/p>\n
have any’ bearing on the ciaim of the petitioners in their<\/p>\n
 i;e.,io.s. 607\/05 and 705\/05.\n<\/p>\n
ix<\/p>\n
IO<\/p>\n
Since the suits have been filed in 2005 and___ 2006,<\/p>\n
the Triai Court is directed to dispose of the th.;*eef–s\u00a3;–its,<\/p>\n
keeping in view the provisions made under the <\/p>\n
(Case F-“Eow Management in Su.bo.rdinate””C”oa’_rts’)” Riiies,’\u00e9V’<\/p>\n
2005, expeditiously and at any exvie\u00e9ntfwijthin..a'”periodV’i_’:ofTs\u00a3–\u00a7(<\/p>\n
months from the date a cop*y_of_thisAorder_is’.:pAia.\u00a2ed..o*’n the-it<\/p>\n
record of the suits.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court U Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010 Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 2″” DAY OF SEPTEMBER, BEFORE WRIT PETITEON ND,1837″”\/201D ” BETWEEN: U. NAGESH NAYA:<~.._ S\/D LATE ANANTHA NAY'AK,:;_= THE HON'BLE MR. 3USTICE A.N-; 'V'E'E\\lL}'G'.,(")P(A"1.:AA:GDWDA7, A AGED 55 YEARS, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-251014","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nU Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"U Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-09-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-05-05T08:55:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"U Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-05T08:55:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1152,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010\",\"name\":\"U Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-05T08:55:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"U Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"U Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"U Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-05-05T08:55:39+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"U Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-05T08:55:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010"},"wordCount":1152,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010","name":"U Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-05T08:55:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/u-nagesh-nayak-vs-murugha-mutt-on-2-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"U Nagesh Nayak vs Murugha Mutt on 2 September, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/251014","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=251014"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/251014\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=251014"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=251014"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=251014"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}