{"id":77667,"date":"2010-10-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010"},"modified":"2016-09-25T11:04:41","modified_gmt":"2016-09-25T05:34:41","slug":"h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"H B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
H B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Jawad Rahim<\/div>\n
I\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\n\nDATED THIS THE 23\" DAY OF OCTOBER \n\nBEFORE\nTHE HON'B\u00a3.E MRJUSTICE 3AwAO--\u00bbRARH'IE\u00a74ij .\n\nM1Sc.cvL. NO.18::'-'l62\u00bb'\/'iUjj,A'N[i'4,A'*--V ' A  A\nc.R.R NO. 29R9\/2010 * '\nBETWEEN:   \n\nH.B.BOREGOWDA, _\nAGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,  \nS\/O K.BOREGQWD_A,    \nRESIDING AT 1iE1v4J,T.2--'--\"F?  M\n4\" MAIN ROAD, --  A   \nVI3AYNA{5AR, \" 1  A  \u00bb\nBANGALORE' -- 53,602: O40  S '  V. \n\n    'V  ..    PETITIONER\n\n(By    ADV., FOR\n M\/'S..D.F_iAR'MASi*!.R'EE ASSOCIATES, ADV.,)\n\nAND: _  _\n1. \\lEF'\\Ol'K.ATESVFV!_AAN--,,O' \n\n_;j' '' MAJOR'; . \n gs\/O..T.\u00a7.ATE V;'------MAHALINGAM\n\nA J  _ 'v;E:'ARjH,ARAN,\n\n \"M.AJ,OR.','v~\"\"\nA S\/O KATESHAN\n\n~ BOTH THE RESPONDENTS ARE<\/pre>\n
 ‘RESIOING AT THE OUTHOUSE,
\n 4TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM,
\nBANGALORE — 560 003
\n RESPONDENTS<\/p>\n
. ‘2. i_-ie.ardn.’ <\/p>\n
2<\/span><\/p>\n
MISC. CVL. IS FILED U\/S 151, CPC, PRAYING TO STAY
\nTHE OPERATION AND EXECUTION OF THE ORDEP;–.,_DATED
\n24.08.2010 PASSED BY THE XXX ADDL. CITY CI.VIL443l_VJDGE
\nAT BANGALORE IN MISC.NO.678\/2008.\n<\/p>\n
CRP IS FILED U\/S 115, cpc, i=ILEDr’r4.AGA.I,i\\iSTie\u00bbTriE._
\nORDER DATED 24.8.2010 PASSED IN MIS*C.678\/O8 ON THE
\nFILE OF xxx ADDLCITY cI:vIL~1tiD_GE.,. fr3’ANoA.i_Oi2E, T
\nALLOWING THE PETITION FILED U\/QLIX, E.uLE*I3_, w..;cr\u00bbc, <\/p>\n
SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED.2:3.’1._1′..2.VOO6
\nPASSED IN O.s. 661\/O3. I I. ‘  2 _ v<\/p>\n
This appiication along  the pet’it.iorI coming on for
\nadmission this day, tl*i’e__court”‘i*Ii’a_ci*e the following’<\/p>\n
A I ;0__<\/p>\n
I   <\/p>\n
This   the order dated
\n24.8.201O”ViII_”~–!\\{i’i’stI’.._ “67.a1,iIoa._ if;y’i’~rrhich the ex parte decree
\nis set aside. The petition
\nis po:st.ed\u00ab0.f0r: Along with the petition, Misc.
\nCv|A.1_846x2)’-w1Q’ isIf.i.|ed’v.se’e0i<ing stay.<\/p>\n
  Coritextiial facts needing reference are:<\/p>\n
 re)' Petitioner herein filed O.S.661\/03 seeking recovery<\/p>\n
I '*0if..4Rs.Ii,10,0O0\/– from the respondents herein on the basis<\/p>\n
 they had borrowed the amount as ioan in the second<\/p>\n
I I ""Cweei< of October 2001 and for valuabie consideration, had<\/p>\n
3<\/span>
\nexecuted an on–demand promissory note and consideration<\/p>\n
receipt. The amount was actually paid on 10._,1..{\u00a7_:;’2:O=i31 as<\/p>\n
evidenced by the negotiable instrument <\/p>\n
Dlaint.\n<\/p>\n
b) It was alleged that  ldAemaind~:”t\u00abhei.__ L<\/p>\n
petitioner to pay the amount _resp4onAd’e.nts fa,’i.i”ed.,v”coiiseqiivileiity
\nto which repeated requests  made,_Vbuti.’inV\u00e9V.y:a’iVnV.it In the
\nsuit, summons were ‘\u00a7:;4;’.igj1ered.”‘”tV’c’,’ ‘vi.I+;i\u00a7,aEde.fendantsuwhich were
\nreturned with postal   The learned<\/p>\n
trial judge notliriiwyr\u00e9g the eiwdorseimientgheid service of notice<\/p>\n
as si:iifficlien.f:iVi,andlfpplaced’ the\\_Wd’ef’vendants ex parte. In the
\nsubsetguentVexvlpartel’proceedings, the evidence tendered by<\/p>\n
the._petiti’on_er._’,was_ received which was ocular and<\/p>\n
 do._c\u00b0tmji-entapry. “”””‘i”iioticing that ocular testimony was<\/p>\n
 documents, the suit was decreed on<\/p>\n
‘~  The decree was put into execution before the same<\/p>\n
 .court in which coercive process was issued. When the<\/p>\n
‘process was to be executed against them, they issued two<\/p>\n
4<\/span>
\ncheques dated 31.7.2008 for Rs.50,000\/- each” to the
\nAmeen (process server) who had gone to e_\\’ve_ct.i_te.Vthe<\/p>\n
warrant.\n<\/p>\n
d) The cheques on presentation were**d.–i.sh.on’o:ured <\/p>\n
in that regard separate proceedSangs;haiuezbe-en= \u00a7’I”l’il’.’::.l”.’:.i’_t\u20ac?-2″?’-v”:if3′}7 ‘<\/p>\n
the petitioner to prosecuteithe res”p.ondents\u00bb”fQA;-.the <\/p>\n
punishable under Section  Negotialble instruments<\/p>\n
e) The respondents  an application
\nunder  M–isc.678\/O8 seeking to
\nset  dated 23.11.2006 on the
\nQroundlittt\u00e9t they: received’ summons in the suit<\/p>\n
anoj\u00a7tha.t hadV”sufficierit cause to show their absence on the<\/p>\n
 ‘date  their appearance.\n<\/p>\n
A V’f’)”A”‘_i7hespetition met with serious resistance from the<\/p>\n
pe.t’itio”ner”herein who, in unequivocal terms, described the<\/p>\n
 “ave.rmVents as a falsity, lacking bona fides. Both parties led<\/p>\n
‘7e’\\’\/lidjence. The contention of the petitioner that they were<\/p>\n
it “served with summons was on the basis that the postal cover<\/p>\n
(<\/p>\n
5<\/span>
\nwas tendered which they declined to receive and therefore,
\nthe postal authorities had to return  as<\/p>\n
“unclaimed”. Therefore, presumption  <\/p>\n
envisaged under Section 27 ofjthe Genei’ail,’_~Cl’a:uses.t_:ACt<\/p>\n
accrues to their benefit and convtientioens to\u00bb._th.e”‘coiit’i=ary;_are <\/p>\n
to be rejected.\n<\/p>\n
4. The learned trial 3’udg,e:cQn_s’i~d_,ered’  nds urged
\nby both sides with  on record and
\nrecords of pro:ce_edings””i-nit: is elaborate<\/p>\n
disczussion-~o’n_ a1js,_oects_’ canvassed, but it boils down to the<\/p>\n
fo|lo\\,vi’nClV:” — fl , if <\/p>\n
I) – W-heth_i’e.r’~.._there was sufficient service of<\/p>\n
 *surnm’cns–,ojn the defendants and if so, was<\/p>\n
there; sufficient cause shown by them to set<\/p>\n
a’s~id,e the decree dated 23.11.2006?\n<\/p>\n
_1I) -.4v”Whether the court was right in directing return<\/p>\n
 \u00bb ” o_f”_the cheques collected through court ameen to
\n the respondents-defendants?\n<\/p>\n
5. *~_”R’:egarding the first ground, learned trial judge has<\/p>\n
 ,noticed there was discrepancy in the address of the<\/p>\n
‘Erespondents. While in the postal cover, the address was<\/p>\n
“no.31\/1, 2″” floor, 4″‘ Cross, Malieswaram,” the actual<\/p>\n
6<\/span>
\naddress was “No.31, 1” fioor, 4″‘ Cross, Maileswaram
\n(outhouse). Therefore, he opined that there was..dif.fer_ence<\/p>\n
in the description of the address which shoui_d\u00a5V_:fa’c’cru’e__te.__.t’ne<\/p>\n
benefit of the respondents–defendant_s;’~..’\/’::E’2e’s’\u00e9des, <\/p>\n
substantiai finding of the triai court isatiiata.3urnrnnnjwas,a_not <\/p>\n
served. There was no eviden’c.e. tolsholw
\nwas “tendered” and V__responVd4_e’nt:s -.were”no_ti.fiedf% to receive
\nthe cover. In the aVb’s:encpe’\u00e9–.of{_n’otir:e.:to.\u00bbp receive the postal
\ncover, the endorsement’:l?u’ncl’ai\u00abrne’d””_ ‘factually incorrect
\nand on   held summons
\nwas   filed beiatediy was<\/p>\n
entertainedtV’V””.V–~..\n<\/p>\n
6. ___The'”~p_etitic~ne’r.-plaintiff has seriously assaiied the<\/p>\n
 ju:d\u20acgnient~,. Lea’i”‘i”ied counsei with vehemence, would<\/p>\n
i  the learned trial judge has misunderstood the<\/p>\n
‘intent Va.n’dE__purpose of Rule 13 of Order IX, C.P.C. He would<\/p>\n
 conte.n__d that the provision is not available unless it is shown<\/p>\n
 there was no service of summons. Besides, the<\/p>\n
it ___5applicant must establish by acceptable evidence that he was<\/p>\n
prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before court.<\/p>\n
at<\/p>\n
‘7
\nAccording to him, in the instant case, the evidence tendered
\ndid not speil out any sufficient cause, much less any cause<\/p>\n
to explain the absence of the respondents.<\/p>\n
7. Regarding service of notice, I have airea-dy;.a__d’verited<\/p>\n
to the contention that mere tendering of..n,o’tice ernoughu<\/p>\n
In this regard, learned counsel  V<\/p>\n
General Ciauses Act to show _onceA’p.|_aintiff had ttiendeifeid <\/p>\n
cover with requisite fee menitioruing the.c”orrect:,address of
\nthe respondents, serxgiee w.’as:.tAg’- .i3v’e,Vvi\u00e9~ffected in the normal
\ncourse. Return of s,u,c’ii.._co’ve:r as”‘\u00e9jn..c*iaimed” or being<\/p>\n
absen’t’ris’e3:’f,t’o :’afp’i’esu.m’ptvion in law that it was due
\nservice, Takivngvif~t’he.._::’ii;.en-efit of the said provision, he<\/p>\n
conVtends,””~theV_triai=_ court has seriously erred in not<\/p>\n
 dist’i’ng;uEshing between the words “received” and ”service”.<\/p>\n
  “I_a”m :u’n:ai34i’eA.,.tO;.accept these contentions because Section 27<\/p>\n
iunyjddoubtedifiyilgives rise to the presumption of service of<\/p>\n
 notic’e_tendered in the normal course and through registered<\/p>\n
 vp_osi:. But the presumption is always rebuttabie and to raise<\/p>\n
  __:i:he presumption certain circumstances must exist. The<\/p>\n
court has to be vigiiant.\n<\/p>\n
8<\/span><\/p>\n
8. There are two circumstances in which postal covers
\nare normally returned, despite address being4.co\u00bbrr_ec_t: i)<\/p>\n
addressee was “absent” and ii) “unc|aime’d””.~.’x~’….,,.1’f2-___t’he<\/p>\n
endorsement is “absent”, the presumptio’n~—-.coul’d: be well,<\/p>\n
founded. But if it is “unclaimed”,  it–_is-.’in-cum’b_ent on ‘<\/p>\n
the person who seeks hienefit Vllofpxthye  <\/p>\n
establish that there was notic’e,,:o;’.,,_such” registeyired post to
\nthe addressee and Vdeispite it,ch-e\ufb02failed to claim. The
\nburden, undoubtedly,v,l.~iioul:cl be who proposes<\/p>\n
due servic\u00e9ei-_.:V  _,pase’,’uti’ie petitioner. In the<\/p>\n
a bse   “reg a rd i n g reg iste red cover<\/p>\n
was giv.e’n.’.to presumption could be raised. In
\nthis_view”‘”oF_:th.\u00a7}_matte’i;,” as there is no other material to
\n  Show sthat.notice\/imimation of registered cover was given to
\n   1  (respondents) by the postman, the
\n “unclaimed” should be taken as not proved.
\n Once”  not so, undoubtedly summons cannot be taken as
\n  been duly served. Presumption in this fact situation,<\/p>\n
will not be available to be raised against the respondents.<\/p>\n
9<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
9. Under Rule 13 of Order IX, C.P.C., two circumstances<\/p>\n
are enumerated: the court passing ex parte_,vd_ecre.e as<\/p>\n
envisaged under Rule 6 is vested with the di-s_:\u00abc.r’etiVt;j’;f;.<\/p>\n
aside the ex parte decree when applied _.for’,’<\/p>\n
was not duly served or that   pirevfented:”t>y’i*I1.any .<\/p>\n
sufficient cause from appea_rin,g before thev’,:co.urt…when% <\/p>\n
suit was called. Once it  was not
\nserved, then the first”‘~part,   come into play
\nand consequently  of hearing
\ncannot be   other words, once it
\nis shown served, the consequence
\nwouldibe  ‘applicant was not aware of the
\ndate of ‘heariVng’;  of summons itself has to be<\/p>\n
congstlrued as suifficient cause to set aside the ex parte<\/p>\n
. ‘d\u00abecree.V..T.he,trial court, in the instant case, has done this<\/p>\n
H ~.\\\/ery  It has ascertained about due service and<\/p>\n
being “convinced there was no due service, held against the<\/p>\n
 ‘rp=et_i.tioVner. The finding is on facts. This is a revision under<\/p>\n
i’s~s”ection 115, C.P.C. calling for no re–appraEsa| of facts, but<\/p>\n
if “only to test the legality of the impugned order.<\/p>\n
\ufb01:\\,D\u00ab\/<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
10. In order to examine whether the discretion has been
\nexercised judiciously, I have referred to facts d4i.scussed in
\nthe foregoing paragraphs. I am satisfied <\/p>\n
no interference.\n<\/p>\n
11. The second ground urged  w,h.i,|teiv.ex <\/p>\n
parte decree dated 23.11.2005, thteatriai  red.<\/p>\n
to bind the respondents  iiefeurenceilgis made to
\nOrder IX Rule 13,  :p.o,sht;uia,,tes that ‘the court
\nshall make an order s_     as against him
\nupon such,    into court or\n<\/p>\n
 -and shall appoint a day for
\nproceedlrvgwlth   Laying emphasis on the words<\/p>\n
‘uppnv such ‘terms as to costs and payment into court’,<\/p>\n
.’ :i’eaVrneSd,c–o:u’nse| submits the direction issued by the trial<\/p>\n
 .,c\u00a7.;i,rt VV\ufb011;i1Ar’fe\u00bb::ti’n’g”V.the parties to return two cheques in a sum of<\/p>\n
 given by the respondents during execution of<\/p>\n
2 “CF’l5,’_ exwparte decree, is illegal and does not conform to Rule<\/p>\n
 This contention must fail for the reason when ex parte<\/p>\n
it “decree has been set aside. The parties have to be restored<\/p>\n
atzy,<\/p>\n
ii
\nto their originai position. Gain could be had to Section 144,
\nC.P.C. which reads thus:\n<\/p>\n
Sec.i44: APPLICATION FOR RESTITUTIQN’:5–.’.,’_~:i.’..[:  <\/p>\n
(1) Where and in so far as a de_c~ree.f0,r’an. _
\norder is varied or reversed”-in any_..a_pp’eai,-[L “A
\nrevision or other proceedings oris? set ‘a_si’de’or-.,_
\nmodified in any suit instituted for the ‘p.ur’D.05e”,,_'”~
\nthe court which passed theVd_e’cree ;o’rj;order_\u00a7
\nshaii, on the application ‘of any ipar–i:y’*en’titIed<\/p>\n
to any benefit by wave of restitution} or
\notherwise, causesuchi”r’estitu’t-ion to be made<\/p>\n
as wiii, so far fmay be,.p’:~a_c.e”‘the parties in<\/p>\n
the position which_i_’they.1’wou_id\u00bb.have occupied<\/p>\n
but for such de.cree. or order ‘such part
\nthereofas–has;be,enV;varied.,_ inciueding orders<\/p>\n
for the re,Fu’n,d .o’f.cb,_s’ts and for”t’|’i’e payment of
\ninteres”t_,..,G-a’rnage,\u00ab–._con*i’pe’rjsa_t’ion and mesne
\nprofits,’:.._w’,hich ‘a.re”‘-Iizroperiyg. consequentiai on
\n\u00absuch_’\u00a5’ariait;ions,.,”–rever’sai,” setting aside or<\/p>\n
 mod_ifi<;atio_n"\u00abof 't.he-decree of order.'<\/p>\n
Ex'pi_anati"on:"" purposes of subsection
\n._(1), "the \u00abe_5<.'Dre\u00bbssiOn "court which passed the
\ndecree 'or_,orderf" shall be deemed to include,-<\/p>\n
 ' _'*(._a) Where the decree or order has<\/p>\n
"been'q_v'aried or reversed in exercise of<\/p>\n
. "app-.eIia_te"or revisional jurisdiction, the court of
\nfi_rsti~"i._ns'tance;\n<\/p>\n
V (b) where the decree or order has been
\nset aside by a separate suit, the court of first
\ninstance which passed such decree or order;<\/p>\n
(c) where the court of first instance has<\/p>\n
ceased to exist or has ceased to have
\njurisdiction to execute it, the court which, if<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
the suit wherein the decree or order was
\npassed were instituted at the time of making’–.,
\nthe application for restitution under
\nsection, would have jurisdiction to try….su.ch*J;
\nsuit.   ‘<\/p>\n
(2) No suit shall be institutedfor t.\u00a7’1’e”pu7rpo’s.e”.,<\/p>\n
of obtaining any restitution “or. o.ther.,_rei_ie_f”” .<\/p>\n
which could be obtained by appli-cation.  <\/p>\n
subsection (1). 3    *  ‘
\nThus from provision Section”t\u00abs.,.i\u00a344, it s’een  when a
\ndecree is set aside,.an.nulledWo’r~:iyayried, thecoiurt shall, on
\nthe appiication of any party  benefit by way of
\nrestitution or’ot.herwise,;cause\u00e9isuchf\u00e9fstitution to be made.<\/p>\n
It leaves no the parties have to be put
\nto their origiiinal*p_,o’sition'”as they were before the said decree
\nwas passed; vA’ny_  pursuance of the decree which<\/p>\n
isyiater set “aside, annulled or modified must be undone.<\/p>\n
 ifhe word-s,vA:’ap__pearing in Section 144, C.P.C. for refund of<\/p>\n
 ~.cb.-st ‘ihpvayment of interest, damages or<\/p>\n
comp’ensaition by way of mesne profits gives wide<\/p>\n
 “power”to the court which has varied or annulled the decree<\/p>\n
 “pass the order directing refund of the amount if it is a<\/p>\n
money decree and to restore possession if it is a decree<\/p>\n
13<\/span>
\nreiating to possession, and similar decrees. But Ruie 13 of<\/p>\n
Order IX refers oniy to cost. In the instant case,_iss’u.aince of<\/p>\n
two cheques by the respondents to the pet.E–t?_i’onAe’~r.j’ythrouTgih<\/p>\n
Ameen is on 31.8.2008 when coercive process.was’.Viss.ued.y <\/p>\n
against them. That warrant undAoutg’ted’iy\u00e9’ivva’sin ‘puirsuabnce <\/p>\n
of the decree which is  tsetrasiividiegj…,_HSViace
\ndecree is set–aside, the chequVeAs:_issued..by_tVhe_r?espondents
\nwere iiabie to be returnedtoitthhe”=d’ete’nd’ants. Even if they
\nhad made payment the\u00bb; jurisdiction to
\npass the    of the matter, the
\nclirectiono3’.th’e1’V\u00ab1tria_’i  the cheques received by
\nthe  the ambit of Section 144,
\nC.P.C.   be beyond the jurisdiction of<\/p>\n
the\u00a7:cou.rt.\n<\/p>\n
  anxiety expressed by iearned Counsei is piaced<\/p>\n
   triai has to be expedited.\n<\/p>\n
13″;~  is submitted that the petitioner has ied<\/p>\n
V nevidence, the respondent shalt cross–examine them on the<\/p>\n
 date on which the suit wilt be posted and if there is any<\/p>\n
14<\/span>
\nadditional evidence from the p|aintiff–petitioner, then within
\nten days thereafter. With these observations, th_e’~.petiiit~i.Qn is<\/p>\n
disposed of. Miscncvl. 18462\/10 stands reje_ctedi.f  .<\/p>\n
vgh*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court H B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 2010 Author: Jawad Rahim I IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 23″ DAY OF OCTOBER BEFORE THE HON’B\u00a3.E MRJUSTICE 3AwAO–\u00bbRARH’IE\u00a74ij . M1Sc.cvL. NO.18::’-‘l62\u00bb’\/’iUjj,A’N[i’4,A’*–V ‘ A A c.R.R NO. 29R9\/2010 * ‘ BETWEEN: H.B.BOREGOWDA, _ AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, S\/O […]<\/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-77667","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nH B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 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\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"H B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-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=\"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-25T05:34:41+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"H B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-25T05:34:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2432,\"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\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010\",\"name\":\"H B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-25T05:34:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"H B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"H B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 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\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"H B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-25T05:34:41+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"H B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-25T05:34:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010"},"wordCount":2432,"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\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010","name":"H B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-25T05:34:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-b-boregowda-vs-venkateshan-on-23-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"H B Boregowda vs Venkateshan on 23 October, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/77667","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=77667"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77667\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=77667"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=77667"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=77667"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}