1 in the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore Dated This the 13Th Day of June 2013 Before the Hon'ble Dr. Justice K. Bhakthava
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2013 BEFORE THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. BHAKTHAVATSALA WRIT PETITION Nos.2838-2839/2013 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. MR. LOY PREM D"SOUZA S/O LAZARUS D SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT KADJA HITTLU, DEREBAIL KONCHADY, ASHOK NAGAR POST, MANGALORE-575006 2. MR. LIONEL PRAKASH D SOUZA S/O LAZARUS D SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT KADJA HITTLU, DEREBAIL KONCHADY, ASHOK NAGAR POST, MANGALORE-575006. REP. BY THEIR FATHER AND GPA HOLDER LAZARUS D SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS R/AT KADJA HITTLU, DEREBAIL KONCHADY, ASHOK NAGAR POST, MANGALORE-575006 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CYRIL PRASAD PAIS, ADV.,) 2 AND: 1. MR. HAROL MARK FERNANDES AGED 41 YEARS, S/O LATE MRS. IRENE FERNANDES NEE REBELLO, R/AT "HILL VIEW", ULLAS NAGAR, KAVOOR, MANGALORE, 2. MR. EROL FERNANDES AGED 38 YEARS, S/O LATE MRS. IRENE FERNANDES NEE REBELLO, R/AT "HILL VIEW", ULLAS NAGAR, KAVOOR, MANGALORE. 3. MRS. NIRMAL D CUNHA AGED 35 YEARS, D/O LATE MRS. IRENE FERNANDES NEE REBELLO, R/AT A 2, 2ND FLOOR, ALBA-VISTA APARTMENT, BALIKASHRAMA ROAD, KANKANADY, MANGALORE-575002. 4. MRS. EVLINE D SOUZA W/O L.C.D SOUZA AGED 77 YEARS, D/O LATE JACKIM SANTHAN REBELLO, R/AT 3B WNDSOR MANOR, HIGHLANDS, FALNIR, MANGALORE-575001 5. MR. VELERIAN REBELLO AGED 75 YEARS, S/O LATE JACKIM SANTHAN REBELLO, R/AT TWINKLE STAR HOUSING SOCIETY, GHATLA VILLAGE, CHEMBOOR, MUMBAI-22. 3 6. REV. FATHER ALEXANDAR REBELLO S/O LATE JACKIM SANTHAN REBELLO, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, LADY OF DOLORUS CHURCH, NO.147, B.GANGULY STREET KOLKATTA, WEST BENGAL-02. 7. MRS. JULIANA D CUNHA W/O JOSEPH D CUNHA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, D/O LATE JACKIM SANTHAN REBELLO, R/AT MARIA KRIPA HOUSE, BEJAI MUNDANA, BEJAI POST, MANGALORE-575004 8. SMT. BENEDICT REBELLO W/O LAWRENCE REBELLO AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, D/O LATE JOCKIM SANTHAN REBELLO, R/AT "ANCORAGE", NEAR AIRPORT SCHOOL, BAJPE POST, MANGALORE-574142. 9. MR. VINCENT REBELLO AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, S/O LATE JOCKIM SANTHAN REBELLO, R/AT "AGNES", KADJA HITHILU, DEREBAIL KONCHADY, ASHOKNAGAR POST, MANGALORE-06. 10. MR. RAPHEAL REBELLO AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O LATE JOCKIM SANTHAN REBELLO, R/AT POMPEI HOUSE, BEHIND MARKET, KINNIGOLI POST, KINNIGOLI, MANGALORE TALUK-574150. 4 11. MR. A RAMESH BHANDARY S/O LATE RAMANNA BHANDARY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT KADJA HITTLU, DEREBAIL KONCHADY, ASHOKNAGAR POST, MANGALORE-06. 12. MR. K S SIDHARTHA S/O K W SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT KADJA HITTLU, DEREBAIL KONCHADY, ASHOKNAGAR POST, MANGALORE-06. 13. MRS. K S CHANDRAVATHI W/O K S SIDHARTHA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT KADJA HITTLU, DEREBAIL KONCHADY, ASHOKNAGAR POST, MANGALORE-06. 14. MRS. SRIKALA SHASHINDRA W/O MR. SHASHINDRA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT KADJA HITTLU, DEREBAIL KONCHADY, ASHOKNAGAR POST, MANGALORE-06. 15. MR. ANIL KUMAR S/O RAVINDRA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT KADJA HITTLU, DEREBAIL KONCHADY, ASHOKNAGAR POST, MANGALORE-06. ... RESPONDENTS THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING 5 TO QUASH THE ORDER DT.19.11.2012 PASSED BY THE 3RD ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT MANGALORE ON I.A.NO.XVII FILED U/O 6 RULE 17 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN O.S.NO.29/2011 VIDE ANNX-A AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS. THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: O R D E R Petitioners, who are defendant Nos.8 and 9 in O.S.No.29/2011 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge at Mangalore, D.K., are before this Court praying for quashing the order dated 19.11.2012 passed on I.A.No.17 at Annexure-A in the above said suit. 2. Petitioners have filed detailed written statement. Suit is for partition and separate possession. The proposed amendment is nothing but expansion of para 10 of the written statement. At the stage of cross-examination of PW1, present petitioners filed an application seeking permission to amend the written statement and incorporate para 24(a). The trial Court is justified in rejecting the application filed under 6 Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC. I see no illegality and infirmity in the impugned order. In the result, the writ petitions fail and the same are hereby rejected. Sd/- JUDGE PMR .