Karnataka High Court
Smt Nagamani vs Smt K Padmini on 21 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:46834
CRP No. 503 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.503 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. NAGAMANI
W/O. SRI PRABHAKAR,
D/O. LATE VENKATASHAMAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
RESIDING AT CAR STREET,
VENKATASHAMAPPA POULTRY FARM,
NEAR RAILWAY STATION,
DODDABALLAPURA TOWN,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561 203.
2. SRI. SATHISH KUMAR M.
S/O. SRI MUNIVENKATAPPA
@ VENKATAPPA AND
LATE ALUMELAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.14,
SY.NO.18/1, CAR STREET,
Digitally
signed by VENKATASHAMAPPA POULTRY FARM,
SUMA NEAR RAILWAY STATION,
Location: DODDABALLAPURA TOWN,
HIGH
COURT OF BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561 203.
KARNATAKA ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHRIDHARA K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. K. PADMINI
W/O. LATE S. SRINIVASAMURTHY
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.315,
5TH MAIN, 9TH CROSS,
2ND BLOCK, R.T. NAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 032.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:46834
CRP No. 503 of 2023
2. SRI SUHAS ISLOOR
S/O. DR. SURESH S. ISLOOR,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
RESIDING AT SULAKSHANA NILAYA,
2ND CROSS, PANCHAYATI COLONY,
SHIMOGA-577 201.
3. MANAGING DIRECTOR
ANDRA PRADESH STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION,
MADANAPALLI, CHITTUR DISTRICT,
ANDRA PRADESH-517 325.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC., AGAINST
THE ORDER DATED 17.01.2023 PASSED ON I.A. NO.I AND II IN O.S.
NO.653/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
DODDABALLAPURA REJECTING THE I.A.I AND II FILED UNDER
ORDER 39 RULES 1 AND 2 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE,
1908.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The plaint filed in O.S.No.653/2022 is rejected by the
Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Doddaballapura (henceforth
referred to as 'Trial Court') in exercise of the suo-moto power
under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC'
for short) and under Order VII Rule 11(d) of CPC. In that view
of the matter, rejection of the plaint in a suit amounts to a
decree as defined under Section 2(d) of CPC.
NC: 2023:KHC:46834
2. The office has raised an objection regarding
maintainability of this petition, which is filed under Section 115
of CPC. In that view of the matter, the office objection raised
regarding maintainability of the petition is upheld.
Consequently, this revision petition is dismissed as not
maintainable.
3. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to file
a Regular First Appeal challenging the judgment and decree
passed by the trial Court. If such an appeal is filed, the time
consumed in pursuing this revision petition shall be deducted
while calculating the limitation applicable to an appeal.
4. Office is directed to return the certified copy of the
impugned order to the learned counsel for the petitioners after
retaining a photocopy of the same.
Sd/-
JUDGE
VMB
