w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



M/s. Avon Township Developers A Partnership Firm Having Its Registered Office, Represented By Its Managing Partner Anji Reddy, Bengaluru v/s M/s. Teleradiology Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Represented By Its Director, Arjun Kalyanpur, Bengaluru & Others

    Writ Petition No. 7418 of 2022 (GM-CPC)

    Decided On, 05 April 2022

    At, High Court of Karnataka

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH

    For the Petitioner: S. Sreevatsa, Senior Advocate, S. Sammith, Advocate. For the Respondents: --------



Judgment Text

(Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 29th March, 2022 as contained in Annexure-P passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural and etc.,)

1. This Writ petition is filed by the defendant No.3 in Original Suit No.382 of 2022 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru (for short, hereinafter referred to as ‘trial Court’), challenging the order dated 29th March, 2022.

2. The relevant facts for adjudication of this writ petition are that the respondent No.1, who is the plaintiff, has filed Original Suit No.382 of 2022 on the file of the trial Court, seeking relief of specific performance of the Agreement to sellcum- assignment agreement dated 09th October, 2019 and consequential relief as set out in the plaint. It is the case of the defendant No.3/petitioner herein that the defendant No.3 has entered appearance before the trial Court on 28th March, 2022 and sought time to file objections to the applications as well as to file written statement to the Court. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned to 29th March, 2022. The daily case status reflects that the matter was set down on 29th February, 2022 for orders on IA. It further reflects that the trial Court has heard the parties on IAs and posted for orders by 06th April, 2022. It is also forthcoming form Annexure-Q produced in the writ petition that the defendant has made application, seeking certified copy of the order sheet on 31st March, 2022. However, he was not able to secure copy of the daily order sheet. The grievance of the defendant No.3 is that defendant No.3 was not heard insofar as IAs.1 to 4 is concerned. Accordingly, this writ petition is preferred by defendant No.3.

3. I have heard Sri. Sreevatsa, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri. S. Sammith, learned counsel for petitioner, who contended that the trial Court by order dated 18th February, 2022 (Annexure-P) issued summons to defendants. The trial Court adjourned the matter to hear on the applications by 23rd February, 2022. Thereafter, the defendants entered appearance, however, they were not able to get copy of applications filed by the plaintiff nor plaint in the suit. It is also submitted by the learned Senior Counsel that the opportunity of hearing is not given to the defendants on applications filed by the plaintiff. Therefore, he submitted that the matter stands posted for orders by 06th April, 2022. In that view of the matter, the learned Senior Counsel sought for interference of this Court with order dated 29th March, 2022 passed by the trial Court.

4. In the light of submission made by learned Senior Counsel appearing for petitioner, I have carefully considered the material on record, which would indicate that the trial Court has issued summons on 18th February, 2022 and thereafter, it was listed before the Court on several dates. However, reasonable opportunity for filing written statement as well as objections to the applications have not been given to the defendant No.3, despite the matter is listed before the trial Court on 23.02.2022, 25.02.2022, 28.02.2022, 02.03.2022, 25.03.2022, 28.02.2022 and 29.03.2022. On all these aforementioned dates defendants did not have the benefit of plaint nor applications filed by the plaintiff. However, the trial court has posted the matter for orders on 06th April, 2022. The order sheet of the trial Court dated 29th March, 2022 reads as under:

“Business : Heard. for orders

Next Purpose : ORDERS.

Next Hearing Date : 06.04.2022”

(emphasis supplied)

5. It is trite law that the trial Court shall give an opportunity of hearing to the parties. Perusal of the order sheet in the writ petition would indicate that the suit was listed before the trial Court on several dates as alleged by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner. They were not able to get the copy of the plaint nor the applications. However, the matter was posted for Orders on 06th April, 2022. The copy application filed by the defendant No.3/petitioner is also annexed with the writ papers to evidence the bona fides of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, taking into account the urgency pleaded by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, I am of the view that the tr

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

ial Court ought to accept the objections to be filed by the defendant No.3 on 06th April, 2022 and to pass orders, after affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties in the matter. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of. 6. It is also made clear that the defendant No.3/petitioner herein is permitted to file objections before the trial Court tomorrow i.e., on 06th April, 2022 and the trial Court shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
O R