1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013 B E F O R E THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO.47255/2013 & W.P.NOS.48411-48412/2013 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: M/S. A.J. SHETTY & CO. PVT LTD., A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MOTHI MHAL FALMIR, MANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI A.J. SHETTY, S/O. LATE SANKAPPA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDING AT OPP. COLACO HOSPITAL, BENDORE WELL, MANGALORE. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI K. SANATHKUMAR SHETTY, ADV.) AND: 1. ST. ANTONY’S CHARITY INSTITUTES POST BOX NO.506, JEPPU, MANGALORE REPRESENTED BY LORD BISHOP OF MANGALORE Rt. Rev. Dr. ALOYSIUS PAUL D’SOUZA S/O LATE MATHIAS D’ SOUZA BY HIS GPA HODLER Rev Fr. WILLIAM MENEZES, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O. LIGOURY MENEZES, 2 RESIDING AT BISHOP’S HOUSE, KODIALBAIL MANGALORE – 575 003. 2. St. ANTHONY’S CHARITY INSTITUTES POST BOX NO.506 JEPPU, MANGALORE REP. BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR & DIRECTOR Rev. Fr. DENIS MORAS PRABHU AGED 72 YEARS S/O FRANCIS MORAS RESIDING AT ST. ANTHONY’S CHAIRTY INSTITUTE, JEPPU, MANGALORE-575 001. 3. M/S. KUDPI SRINIVAS SHENOY & CO., A PARTNERSHIP FIRM (REGD.) HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NEW FILED STREET, MANGALORE REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER KUDUPI SRINIVAS SHENOY S/O. KUDUPI GOPALKRISHNA SHENOY, RESIDING AT ATTAVARA, MANGALORE. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI CYRIL PRASAD PAIS, ADV. FOR R1 & R2; NOTICE TO R3 DISPENSED WITH) THESE PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 25.9.2013, PASSED IN MISC.CASE NO.31/2013, ON THE FILE OF DISTRICT JUDGE, MANGALORE, D.K., AT ANNEXURE-A. THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: 3 ORDER These writ petitions were heard and an order was dictated on 27.11.2013, allowing the petitions By putting the petitioner on terms. BeFore the draFt could Be corrected, having entertained a douBt, as to whether the writ petitions are maintainaBle as against the order passed By the learned District Judge in exercise oF the power under Section 24 CPC, having noticed the decision reported in ILR 2007 Kar 114, holding that writ petition is not maintainaBle and only a revision would lie under Section 115 oF CPC, the matters were directed to Be listed For ‘Being Spoken To’. Heard learned counsel on Both sides. The decision, noticed supra, is squarely attracted, since the impugned order is one passed By the learned District Judge in exercise oF the power under Section 24 CPC and not an I.A. Filed in the suit. The writ petitions are not maintainaBle. 4 At this stage, Sri. K.Sanathkumar Shetty, sought permission to convert these writ petitions into Civil Revision Petitions. Permission is granted. Amendment Be carried out within one week. For statistical purposes, these writ petitions are disposed oF. Sd/- JUDGE ca .