: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
Dated this the 16 th day of February 2016
Before
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL
Writ Petition No.101549/2016 (GM-CPC)
Between
1. Krishnagouda, S/o Hanumantgouda Patil, Age: 57 Years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o: Yadwad, Taluk: Gokak, District: Belagavi.
2. Venkanagouda, S/o Devanagouda Patil, Age: 55 Years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o: Yadwad, Taluk: Gokak, District: Belagavi.
3. Mudigouda, S/o Venkanagouda Patil, Age: 55 Years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o: Yadwad, Taluk: Gokak, District: Belagavi. ...Petitioners
(By Sri S.S.Patil, Advocate)
A n d
1. Nethajigouda, S/o Tammanagouda Patil, Age: 60 Years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o: Konnur, Taluk: Ron, District: Gadag. : 2 :
2. Shivanagouda, S/o Venkanagouda Hatti, Age: 28 Years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o: Hole Mannur, Taluk: Ron, District: Gadag.
3. Yallavva, W/o Appanagouda Kempagoudar, Age: 26 Years, Occ: Household Work, R/o: Holemannur, Taluk: Ron, District: Gadag.
4. Janaki, S/o Ishawargouda Patil, Age: 36 Years, Occ: Household Work, R/o: Asuti, Taluk: Ron, District: Gadag.
5. Shashidhar, S/o Shivanagouda Hatti, Age: 31 Years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o: Holemannur, Taluk: Ron, District: Gadag.
6. Ramanagouda, S/o Shivanagouda Hatti, Age: 28 Years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o: Holemannur, Taluk: Ron, District: Gadag.
7. Appanagouda, S/o Timmanagouda Patil @ Kempagoudar, Age: 30 Years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o: Konnur, : 3 :
Taluk: Nargund, District: Gadag.
8. Muttanagouda, S/o Timmanagouda Patil @ Kempagoudar, Age: 25 Years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o: Konnur, Taluk: Nargund, District: Gadag.
9. Kumari Leela, S/o Timmanagouda Patil @ Kempagoudar, Age: 23 Years, Occ: Household Work, R/o: Konnur, Taluk: Nargund, District: Gadag.
10. Kumargouda, S/o Timmanagouda Patil @ Kempagoudar, Age: 20 Years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o: Konnur, Taluk: Nargund, District: Gadag. ...Respondents
(By Sri K.L.Patil, Advocate for C/R1)
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order on I.A.No.62, dated 29.01.2016, passed by the Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudalagi in FDP No.8/2014 produced at Annexure-E.
This writ petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day the Court made the following:- : 4 :
ORDER
Petitioners are respondents 2a, 5 and 6 in the final decree proceedings in F.D.P. No.8/2014 on the file of Civil
Judge and JMFC, Mudalagi.
2. The final decree proceedings arise out of the decree passed in O.S. No.33/1958. Petitioners filed I.A.No.62 under
Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking permission to file objections to the petition by condoning the delay.
3. The Court below has dismissed the application. In paragraph 10 of the order, the Court below has referred to initiation of the proceedings in the year 1989, pendency of the proceedings and the orders passed at different stages including 35 adjournments given from 1991 to 1995 to file objections to the main petition. The Court has also found that respondents/petitioners herein had entered appearance in the year 1989 itself, but had not chosen to file objections to the main petition. Therefore, the inordinate delay in filing objections after lapse of nearly 27 years has been taken into : 5 :
consideration while rejecting the application seeking permission to file objection.
4. Having heard learned counsel for both parties and keeping in mind the nature of the dispute and its length and also the fact that petitioners have not been diligent in filing objections for the last several years, I do not find any need to interfere with the order passed by the Court below. Hence, as there is no failure of justice or apparent illegality, exercise of
jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is not warranted. Petition is, therefore, dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE
Kms