Gururaj vs Ashok And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 1068 Kant

                           1



         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                KALABURAGI BENCH

     DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

                       BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.M.POONACHA


     CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.200021/2018

Between:

GURURAJ S/O SHEKHARAPPA KARADI,
AGE-36 YEARS, OCC: THE PARTNER IN
PANCHARATNA LAND DEVELOPMENT & BUILDERS,
R/O : PLOT NO.1 GURUKRUPA, KALYAN NAGAR,
BLDE HOSPITAL MAIN ROAD, VIJAYAPUR.

                                         ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.D. P. AMBEKAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     ASHOK S/O HANMANTAPPA KAMBLE @ HARIJAN,
       AGE 33 YEARS, OCC AGRI. R/O ARAKERI,
       TAL.VIJAYAPUR-586104.

2.     AMASIDDA S/O HANAMANTHAPPA
       KAMBLE @ HARIJAN, AGE: 35 YEARS
       OCC: AGRI. R/O ARAKERI
       TQ:VIJAYAPUR

3.     SHIVASHANAKARAYYA
       S/O SHIVANANDAYYA MUTTINKANTIMATH,
       AGE: 48 YEARS OCC: BUSINESS
       R/O SHIVAJAI NAGAR BEHIND REGIONAL OFFICE
       OF SYNDICATE BANK MANAGULI ROAD,
       VIJAYAPUR-586101.
                           2



4.    GANGAWWA W/O HANAMANTH KAMBLE
      AGE: 62 YEARS OCC: H.H.WORKS
      R/O HORTI TAL:INDI-586117.

5.    AKKAWWA W/O GURAPPA KAMBLE
      AGE: 47 YEARS OCC: H.H.WORKS
      R/O SANKH TAL:JATH,
      DIST: SANGLI, MAHARASHTRA

6.    MAHADEVI W/O RAVI TALAKERI
      AGE: 44 YEARS OCC: H.H.WORKS
      R/O HORTI TQ: VIJAYAPUR-586117.

7.    LAXMI W/O REVANSIDDA MAKADAM
      AGE: 42 YEARS OCC: H.H.WORKS
      R/O AT POST : LOHARI MAL
      TAL:PANDHARPUR DIST: RAIGAD413304.
       MAHARASTHRA

8.    YALLAVVA W/O SABU KAMBLE
      AGE: 40 YEARS OCC: H.H.WORKS
      R/O SANKH TAL:JATH
      DIST: SANGLI-416412, MAHARASHTRA

9.    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
      REP. BY STATE OF KARNATAKA,
      VIJAYAPUR-586101.

10.   THE TAHASILDAR,
      VIJAYAPUR-586101.

11.   THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
      OF LAND RECORS VIJAYAPUR-586101.

                                        ...RESPONDENTS

(NOTICE TO R-1 TO 4, 6 AND 7 SERVED
 NOTICE TO R-5 & 8 IS HELD SUFFICIENT
BY SRI.SHARANABASAPPA M.PATIL, HCGP FOR R9 TO 11)
                              3



      This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115
of CPC, praying to set aside the order dated 13.04.2018
passed by the Principal District Judge, Vijayapur,
dismissing Civil Misc.No.57/2016, produced at Annexure-B
and etc.

      This petition is coming on for Admission this day,
Court made the following:

                          ORDER

The above petition is filed seeking for the

following reliefs;

(a) Call for the records in Civil Misc.No.57/2016 decided by the Principal District Judge, Vijayapur on 13.04.2018.

(b) Set-aside the order dated 13.04.2018 passed by the Principal District Judge, Vijayapur, dismissing Civil Misc.No.57/2016, produced at Annexure-B.

(c) Consequently allow said Civil Misc.No.57/2016 as prayed for and transfer;

(i) O.S.No.522/2014 on the file of the III Addl. Civil Judge, Vijayapur.

(ii) O.S.No.330/2014 on the file of the Prl.Civil Judge, Vijayapur.

(iii) O.S.No.331/2014 on the file of the Prl.Civil Judge, Vijayapur and

(iv) O.S.No.655/2015 on the file of the Prl.Civil Judge, Vijayapur.

2. It is the case of the Petitioner that he filed

Civil Misc.No.57/2016 before the Principal District

Judge, Vijayapur to transfer O.S.Nos.522/2014,

330/2014, 331/2014 and 655/2015 to the Court of

the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijayapur to be tried

along with O.S.No.141/2015 which was pending

before the said Court.

3. It is the case of the Petitioner that the

parties in the said suit are almost identical and the

suit properties one and the same and hence sought

for the said relief to avoid conflicting findings and

judgments.

4. The Principal District and Sessions Judge,

Vijayapur vide order dated 13.04.2018 dismissed the

petition filed by the petitioner inter-alia, on the ground

that the reliefs in the suits are different and the cause

of action in the said suit have arisen on different dates

and the parties in all the suits are also different,

although the property is the same. It has been further

noted that the suits are at different stages pending on

the file of respective Courts and hence refused to

exercise the discretionary power to transfer the suit.

Being aggrieved, the present petition is filed.

5. In the present petition, the Petitioner has

placed on record the present position of the said suits

which are as follows;

(i) O.S.No.522/2014 pending on the file of the III

Addl. Civil Judge, Vijayapura, filed by the Petitioner is

posted on 27.01.2023 for defendants evidence;

(ii) O.S.No.141/2015 pending on the file of the Prl.

Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Vijayapura, filed by the

Petitioner is posted on 16.02.2023 for final

arguments;

(iii) O.S.No.330/2014 pending on the file of the

Prl.Civil Judge, Vijayapura, filed by Respondent No.3 is

posted on 21.01.2023 for final arguments;

(iv) O.S.No.331/2014 pending on the file of the

Prl.Civil Judge, Vijayapura, filed by respondent No.3 is

posted for issuance of warrant to secure the presence

of a witness;

(v) O.S.No.655/2015 pending on the file of the

Principal Civil Judge, Vijayapura, filed by the Petitioner

has been dismissed vide judgment dated 22.07.2022.

6. It is clear and forthcoming from the

aforementioned that the various suits which the

Petitioner seeks to be tried together are at different

stages of the proceedings and one of them has

already been disposed off.

7. The Principal District Judge has rightly

refused to exercise the discretionary power of transfer

having noticed that the reliefs are different, the cause

of actions are different and the parties are different

and that the suits are at different stages of the

proceedings.

8. The Petitioner has failed to make out any

ground to interfere with the order dated 13.04.2018

and for grant of reliefs sought for in the present

petition.

9. In view of the foregoing, the petition is

dismissed.

SD/-

JUDGE

msr