{"id":29684,"date":"2010-09-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010"},"modified":"2014-07-31T19:09:34","modified_gmt":"2014-07-31T13:39:34","slug":"sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\/O H … on 22 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\/O H … on 22 September, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BAi\\\u00a3GALO__F?.E\n\nDATED THIS THE 22\"\" DAY OF SEPTEMBER, \n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENuGDPAm'\u00a2\u00a7jQIfv9~I:A,A\n\nWRIT PETITION NO . 5252,1120;L0',.(iG\"IYIgE.PC-)\"   E ; A T\n\nBETWEEN:\n\nSRI P R NANJUNDASWAMY SETFY =\nAGED 85 YEARS, . \nS\/O SRI PUTTARAMA SETTY. 5\nR\/A NO.14G6, 22ND CROSS,\u00bb '__ , ,\nI & III BLOCK EAST, '-  J\nJAYANAGAR ' , , \" 0\nBANGALORE 5E0's3.I_\u00e9.\u00ab. \n\n  PETITIONER\n\n(BY SRI G.E.AIAI'\u00a7DI_SH \"r;oAvY'D.A, 'FDR SR1 R.B.SADASI\\\/APPA,\n  . . , .  'I      \n\nAND; \n\n1 SR1H.vES.RINIvASAY.g;owDA\n, S\/O SRLH.vYE'NKATESHAPPA,\n\n AGED 45 YEARS, R\/A NO. 551,\n'I MAIN, NAGENDRA BOCK,\nBSK I-II STAGE,\n\n A.BvAI\\,I<3\u00bb.ALQI'<E 560050.\n\nN?' _  \n\n, ' SR: NAGARAJ\n S,.i'_'O SR1 KRISHNAPPA\nAGED 48 YEARS,\n., _ R'\/A NO. 289, K.G.HALLE\n' '=.,_JALAHAi_LI WEST,\n\n  BEHIND RAMA TEMPLE\n\nBANGALORE 560 015.\n\n\n\nEd\n\n3 SRI RAMANJANEYULU\nS\/O LAKSHMINARAYANAPPA\nAGED 45 YEARS,\n\nSOWMYA STORES, K G HALLI\nJALAHALLI WEST,\n\nBEHIND RAMA TEMPLE\nBANGALORE W 560 015.\n\n4 SMT. S LATHA\nAGED 43 YEARS,\n\nR\/A 11TH MAIN ROAD, _\nJALAHALLI WEST, WARD'N(3~., 3\nBEHIND RAMA TEMPLE " \nBANGAORE 560 0:5.\n\n R"E'SPvONDENT'Sr '\n(BY M\/S. SSP LEX ScIENTI'A,E,''AD-vS.:) '" VA d\n\nTHIS wRITP.ETITj'ION 'IS _i=ILjED UNDER ARTICLES 226\nAND 227 DE THE C;0NSTI--TuTI'ON OE I'I\\I'DvIA~PRAYING TO QUASH\nTHE IMPUGNED..__OF?J3ER\u00ab.,DT'D.._7'{1G\u00ab,C9_~PASSED BY THE 7TH\nADDITIONAL. cIii'Yi.vCI\\2'Ir_ 3UDG,E;v.aAN,GALORE ON I.A.6 IN O.S.\n\n9521\/o4._\\z1,DE\u00bb.ANN1E;<DR--E_"~ ._A'. ' \n\nTHIS PETiTIO_N'vCO'MTfi'\u20ac\u00abG to-N FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING\nIN 'B' GROUP, 'FHIS\u00ab.E")'AY'T,ifiiE._C,OURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:\n\n V'~~-'ORDER\n\nRespondedo' "fp--!\u00aba'intiffS have instituted a Suit against\n\n'-petiitiorter\/defendant for a declaration that the\n\ndefe'rTdarIt"ViE:s_ri;ot entitied to sell\/convey the Sites formed in\n\n'2__the piairit schedule property other than the buyers brought\n\n":i,"_byr"'t.he plaintiffs in terms of the Memorandum of\n\n understanding (MOU) dated 15.o2.2\\oo4 and for\n\n'T\/\u00bb\n\nK'\n\n,\/\n\n\n\n3\npermanent injunction and consequential reliefs. The\npetitioner filed written statement dated 15.01.2005.\n\nPlaintiffs filed LA No.6 seeking permission of the cofort to\n\nincorporate the proposed amendment in \n\nwhich the defendant filed statement of o_bi__evct.ioiis:;~ \n\ntrial court upon consideration of\n\nobjections, has permitted the_ plaintihffs to ign-"cotrporat'e."in"g\n\nthe plaint, the proposed amend'm"e\u00bbnt. Qire_s'tie.fiin.g,:the said\norder, the defendant has'~v.filediAith_is'-wri.tvf'petition," \n2. Sri ,G.B.Nan_d,if's_h_ .iC_VSVofwd'a,,.'"ll'earned advocate\n\nappearivngx 'for?_the7f,ipe'ti'it.i.oner'contended that, LA No.6\nhaving fifteen filed"a;ft.er'--aVbo:ti-t 5 years of institution of the\n\nsuit, VintrodiJci_h9~.a'.'-- new "case and a new cause of action,\n\n  riot to ha\\\/leibeen allowed by the triai court. Learried\n\nr_'_.coo:_nsel:"ifgr\u00bbt'her"_:siiiomitted that, there is no due diligence\n\non pa.rti:ieffV;the plaintiffs in seeking the amendment and\n\n\ufb01even otherwise, the amendment proposed in I.A.No.6 is\n\n"'~"_onne"(:essary to decide the real question in controversy\n\n woetween the parties, which aspect has not befdi considered\n\n1\n-e\nS\/,\n\n\n\n-4+\nand hence, interference is called for. Learned counsel\nplaced reliance on the decision in the case of\nM\/SREVAJEETU BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS VS.\nM\/SNARAYANASWAMY 8t SONS & OTHERS - 2009._SAR\n\n(Civil) 1066.\n\n3. Sri Vishnu Hegde, learned advoca_t--e:i--. \n\nfor the respondents, on the other iia.nd_con_tend'e:d;vthey E"<\/pre>\n
termination of MOU dated 15.02.2094itiaagiing-_be\u00e9h ple’ad\u00e9id.:<\/p>\n
in the written statement, not\u00a7ci’r’.~g the’subs.equ:ent_j’event, in = E’<\/p>\n
order to avoid multiplicity oyf…pr.oceedin.gsi.a_nd_,i\u00a7foi* just<\/p>\n
decisiovninlvtiieiV5.rna\u00e9tte”r,:’i’;;4*t’i\\io.t\u00a7Vw’aVs filed. Learned counsel
\nsubmitted that,  filed before the issues were<\/p>\n
raised. and  _a V .p’.re—-‘tria’i” amendment. Learned counsel<\/p>\n
 \u00ab-._5iib’m’:itted that, t’h’e””a’rnendment is necessary to decide the<\/p>\n
 controversy between the parties, by<\/p>\n
noti__ci%ngV.oi:iwl1Eich, the trial court has rightly overruled the<\/p>\n
“-..objectio,n’1~and has allowed the application, which does not<\/p>\n
   any injustice to the defendant. Lined counsel<\/p>\n
[A<\/p>\n
go<\/p>\n
made submissions in support of the findings and<\/p>\n
conclusion of the triai court in the impugned order,..VV_i’-..4;”~.,_<\/p>\n
4. In view of the rival contentions and    <\/p>\n
the writ petition, which 1 have:”perused–\u00ab, t;hejpoih’t7\u00ab’fo’rh.<\/p>\n
consideration is:\n<\/p>\n
Whether the impugned”‘ar”a’er is ir.rat’foh=a\/”and
\nillegal, calling for inteiffere’nc\u00e9’\u00bb-.jn super:\/isbry
\njurisdiction unci’er” _ Art:ic:i’e of the<\/p>\n
Constitution of India?’  it<\/p>\n
5.     and the written
\nstatemen’tVtM’ou5id in I.A.No.6 is not
\nforeigngto  The rights of the parties in
\nrespect centers around a MOU dated<\/p>\n
15.0;\u00a7.2t”;.04.  execution of the said document and<\/p>\n
 .paymen’t~..m.ad~-e_ in pursuance thereof, does not appear to<\/p>\n
1″bex’i.nirdivspiite.’~h\u00a7;;”E’Vhe defendant in the written statement filed<\/p>\n
 suit had not been framed and thus,<\/p>\n
hashh\u00e9istatied “that, there is termination of the contract.<\/p>\n
A  As on the date I.A.i\\io.6 was filed, issues in the<\/p>\n
rial has not<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
commenced. No legal rights, which has accrued t_o the<\/p>\n
defendant, is sought to be taken away. As far as the:’de’i~aVy<\/p>\n
is concerned, the bar of limitation being not  ~<\/p>\n
of fact, but mixed question of fac_t…and |a_–w’,””r’e:{3fuiVres’_’ trial if V’<\/p>\n
and could be made a subject matter an lissuejbyu V\u00a7’_Vi_i*\u00bb.iiVng:<\/p>\n
effect to the prayer from thegdate I31′.  so * L’<\/p>\n
that no accrued rights of the vtr.ouid,._be,idefeated
\nby allowing or:.A.i\\io.6.”if7..  f <\/p>\n
7.  toea|l’oirii’f”–:.an……i\u00e9\u00abmendment being
\ndiscretionarsf,   sound consideration.
\nThe court granting prayer for
\namendmegnt. of the pre–triaI stage and a<\/p>\n
superior courigiy ought’. not to have interfere with the<\/p>\n
‘sV”‘v.disc’r\u00e9’tio’n e>z<ercised""'i'n aiiowing the amendment in the<\/p>\n
 ,_abs.eVrice"\u00abo_f c\u00e9ogent reasons or compelling circumstances.<\/p>\n
 "Iii the case of B.l<.NARAYANA PILLAI vs.<\/p>\n
Hif"Vi44"'Vgi..:PAnAgMESHWARAM PILLAI & ANOTHER, reported in (2000)<\/p>\n
.'   712, it has been heid as follows:\n<\/p>\n
7<\/span><\/p>\n
“The purpose and object of Order 6 Rule 17 CPC is to
\nallow either party to alter or amend his pleadings in
\nsuch manner and on such terms as may be just: The<\/p>\n
power to allow the amendment is wide and\ufb02canaybe<\/p>\n
exercised at any stage of the p1*oceedir1gs’.lVirn1l”Vtclie3<\/p>\n
interests of justice on the basis of guidelines  V’<\/p>\n
by various High Courts and  Supreme “It  <\/p>\n
true that the amendment cannot. \u00ab-Vblep C3lain1egl\u00bb__pas__a:’<\/p>\n
matter of right and under all l(:i,rc’a_n1stari’ces; . BuL_l’it–,ils’._<\/p>\n
equally true that t.he’ll__c’:”ct11’ts Awhile  such ‘V L’<\/p>\n
prayers should not adoptr…liypert;eohnical approach.
\nLiberal approacl’1~..V_p_ t.:l:;;glV’Vi’-._the ‘general rule
\nparticularly in  ‘other side can be
\ncompensated with thef cost=s_. ll l..l’1″ec’l:1nicalities of law<\/p>\n
should  pelfntitted  the courts in the<\/p>\n
ardntinistrz-r,tion’.y o\u00ab[l_ll”‘justice between the parties.
\nAnlenislrnents’  in the pleadings to avoid<\/p>\n
uncalled for 1r1ul\u00a3isp’li–*.:nity of litigation”.<\/p>\n
 “r~KAeeping””‘\u00a7’nl View the controversy between the<\/p>\n
‘i__p’art\u00a7’es.l::”atlrse”Artpgitoposed amendment has rightly been<\/p>\n
ai|oyyed,V.sil_n’gel the same is necessary for determining the<\/p>\n
“-.real queystton in controversy. There is no change of cause<\/p>\n
  p”‘-‘infraction and the additional pleading & prayer proposed in<\/p>\n
 ta No.6 flows from the contract entered in\ufb01 between the<\/p>\n
parties under the MOU dated 15.02.2004, which __is the<\/p>\n
basis for institution of the suit.\n<\/p>\n
10. The defendant has right <\/p>\n
written statement and no prejudiceAlVo:r’injusti-iCe.:i:s–.lVikVe’i’yV{<\/p>\n
be caused, as the triai of the suit haslnot coymmteniced. a”n.d”aV<\/p>\n
he could be compensated  for ca:isi’i*i’aV-ioflivthe delay<\/p>\n
in disposal of the suit.\n<\/p>\n
11. Keep~:,rrg  case, in my
\nopinion, the.  for proper
\nadjudi\u00a7<3ft.l.QV_T1""\u00bb.Vo'fV5\u00ab:.;:t'_hVe 'yianydtiti in filing I.A.No.6 to
\nincorperate' and prayer, I do not find
\nany mallafiduesyvosl.   the plaintiffs and if I.A.No.6<\/p>\n
hadnot been ali!.OVwed by the trial court, it would have iead<\/p>\n
 'tonmultiipiealitigation and the bar of limitation which the<\/p>\n
"'def'e_nda'nt_"_h_as,raised could be an issue for trial.<\/p>\n
1,2_y;':~ In the case of M\/SREVAJEETU BUILDERS &<\/p>\n
"'l:V'_i3~E\\\/Hl'i:'_LOPERS (supra), suit was filed for recovery of money<\/p>\n
 with a prayer for deciaration, based on gale deed dated<\/p>\n
EN<\/p>\n
V, .\n<\/p>\n
 .A’pe:i< C0.uAift.,:E–n my opinion, the decision has no application<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
30.09.1987. The said sale deed was held to be invalid and<\/p>\n
inoperative by the Apex Court in C.A.Nos.1454–56′<\/p>\n
and thereafter, the Urban Land (Ceiling <\/p>\n
Act, 1976 was repealed. After rep.ea_ling_-of’t’i{e;,.sa’irj”‘e.Act, V”<\/p>\n
plaintiff filed an application for”:am1e’rid’ment”‘ <\/p>\n
substitution of pleadings andV_pr–ayers.’v- liresaildivappl.i.c-ation <\/p>\n
was allowed on 05.04.2003 A,b_y:’thewe_.tgrial”court and when
\nquestioned in writ pet’i’~t.iVpn, it-it  by seeking
\nsubstitution of pe:’eadings’,”thfe  to introduce
\na new case,.. the original plaint
\nand hevncegVilthgeadlmissions made in the
\nplaint  be withdrawn, since it would
\naffect thlewiggintvs  tlj:e..\u00abf:ie:’sp4o’ndents. The order of the trial<\/p>\n
courtlwas set?’as_ide. The said order was affirmed by the<\/p>\n
5?’<\/p>\n
u”to”the i’r’rstant~.,’c’a.se in view of the facts and circumstances<\/p>\n
n oticed  pra . im
\n. _ \/\/N<\/p>\n
H,\u00bb<\/p>\n
13. The trial court has correctly considered
\nI.A.No.6. In the circumstances of the case, the order<\/p>\n
allowing I.A.l\\io.6 is neither irrational nor illegal.<\/p>\n
In the result, I pass the following:\n<\/p>\n
ORDER
\ni. Writ petition is devoid  ‘”anii._’s\u00ab.il’ailiil,.,,\u00a7fariii
\ndismissed. it i it i V
\nii. However, the respondlvents\/plainlti-ifs:ajre\ufb02ipermitted
\nto lncorporategjjttie  in the
\nDlaint W  cost of<\/p>\n
 defendant, within a period of<\/p>\n
three wee-i_<as ay.\n<\/p>\n
 i,.,’The,,defend”a’nt is entitled to file additional written
\n  within three weeks from the date the
\n of the amended plaint is served on his learned<\/p>\n
“_eouhseL<\/p>\n
ix}. The trial court shall raise additional issues,<\/p>\n
including the one relating to bar of limitation by<\/p>\n
E;\n<\/p>\n
\/”\n<\/p>\n
construing the amendment to the plaint having<\/p>\n
been effected on the date I.A,No.6 was <\/p>\n
v. It is made clear that the amendment.’igjeirrmttiedia<\/p>\n
under I.A.No.6 shall not relate bagikiit’0:t’he””date ”<\/p>\n
institution of the suit, but’-..’shfaEiiA.theiiioperatiiik\u00e9frbinj<\/p>\n
the date I.A.6 was
\nvi. In the circumstancesV_e:f’:’t,he\u00bb._\u00bb_case;*pa_rtie\u00a7i; to bear
\ntheir respective’-(tests:in\u00a7.ti\u00a7is””2}i;’;~iAt’petition.\n<\/p>\n
      sd\/-9
\ni” * *” ‘ Iudge<\/p>\n
Ksj\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\/O H … on 22 September, 2010 Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BAi\\\u00a3GALO__F?.E DATED THIS THE 22″” DAY OF SEPTEMBER, BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENuGDPAm’\u00a2\u00a7jQIfv9~I:A,A WRIT PETITION NO . 5252,1120;L0′,.(iG”IYIgE.PC-)” E ; A T […]<\/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-29684","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\/O H ... on 22 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\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\/O H ... on 22 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-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=\"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-07-31T13:39:34+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\\\/O H … on 22 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-07-31T13:39:34+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1294,\"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\\\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010\",\"name\":\"Sri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\\\/O H ... on 22 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-07-31T13:39:34+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\\\/O H … on 22 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":"Sri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\/O H ... on 22 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\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\/O H ... on 22 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-07-31T13:39:34+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\/O H … on 22 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-07-31T13:39:34+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010"},"wordCount":1294,"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\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010","name":"Sri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\/O H ... on 22 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-07-31T13:39:34+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-r-nanjundaswamy-setty-vs-sri-h-v-srinivasa-gowda-so-h-on-22-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri P R Nanjundaswamy Setty vs Sri H V Srinivasa Gowda S\/O H … on 22 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\/29684","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=29684"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29684\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29684"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29684"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29684"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}