2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 14171
- 1 -
CRP No. 100031 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 100031 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1.
SHRI. SRINIVAS BERNU KUNDAR,
AGE: 74 YRS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. 722/2/A, SHANTI NAGAR,
TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI-590001.
2.
SHRI. GOPAL B. KUNDAR,
AGE: 69 YRS, OCC. BUSINESS
R/O. 722/2/A, SHANTI NAGAR,
TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI-590001.
3.
SHRI. SANDEEP V. KUNDAR,
AGE: 32 YRS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. 722/2/A, SHANTI NAGAR,
TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI-590001.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. LAXMAN T.MANTAGANI AND
SRI. NAGARAJ APPANNAVAR, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1.
SHRI. RIAZAHMAD GOUSHIMODDIN MUTAWALLI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. MAHANTESH NAGAR
BELAGAVI-590001.
2.
SHRI. SHOUKATALI MEERASAHEB MUTAWALLI,
AGE: MAJOR OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. H.NO. 173, VISHNU GALLI,
MADHAVPUR-VADAGOAN, BELAGAVI-590001.
- 2 -
CRP No. 100031 of 2022
3.
AHMADSAB MEERASAHEB MUTAWALLI
AGE: MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. H.NO. 173, VISHNU GALLI,
MADHAVPUR-VADAGOAN,
BELAGAVI-590001.
4.
5.
6.
MOHAMMAD HANIF S/O. ABDULKARIM MULLA,
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s,
SMT. MUMTAZ BEGUM
Wd/O MOHAMMAD MULLA,
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. CTS.NO. 3712 DARBAR GALLI,
BELAGAVI-590001.
SRI. HAROON RASHI
S/O. MOHAMMAD HANIF MULLA,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. CTS.NO.3712, DARBAR, GALLI,
BELAGAVI – 590001.
SMT. AISHA W/O. NASIRKHAN PATHAN,
AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. CTS.NO.3712, DARBAR, GALLI,
BELAGAVI – 590001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHRI. MALLIKARJUNASWAMY B.HIREMATH,
SRI. UMESH P.HAKKLAKI AND
SMT. GAYATRI, ADVOCATES)
THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC,
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04.12.2021
PASSED BY THE COURT OF C/C III ADITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND CJM, BELAGAVI ON I.A.NO.13 FILED UNDER
SECTION 152 OF CPC IN O.S.NO.184/2002 WITH COSTS AND
ALLOW THE ABOVE CIVIL REVISION PETITION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
- 3 -
CRP No. 100031 of 2022
Present petition is filed by defendants No.1 to 3
aggrieved by the order dated 04.12.2021 passed in
O.S.No.184/2002 on the file of the III Additional Senior
Civil Judge and CJM, Belagavi on an application filed under
Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short,
‘CPC’) (in I.A.No.13) seeking correction of number of the
property.
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:-
That the above suit in O.S.No.184/2002 was
filed
by
the
respondents
herein
seeking
relief
of
possession. In the plaint which was originally filed, the
property was described as CTS.No.832/10/A-3. It appears
consequent upon impleading certain additional properties,
amended plaint was filed. In the amended plaint, due to
inadvertence, the number of the property was mentioned
as CTS.No.823/10/A-3 instead of mentioning the original
number as CTS.No.832/10/A-3. The said error had gone
unnoticed. Parties lead their evidence, suit was decreed,
- 4 -
aggrieved by the same, the petitioners herein preferred
regular appeal in R.A.No.76/2017, the said appeal also
came to be dismissed. Being aggrieved by the same, the
petitioners herein filed regular second appeal before this
Court in RSA.No.100393/2018. The said appeal is pending
consideration. In the meanwhile, the respondents/plaintiffs
filed execution petition in E.P.No.56/2017 and the decree
was executed by delivering the physical possession of the
property to the respondents herein and the said execution
petition was also closed reporting satisfaction. Thereafter,
it appears that the respondent herein realized the error in
the
description
of
the
property
as
noted
above.
Accordingly, filed an application under Section 152 of the
CPC seeking correction of the said number. On 20.04.2019
the Trial Court had allowed the said application without
notice to the petitioners herein permitting to correct the
errors. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners
herein had come up before this Court by filing a civil
revision petition in CRP.No.100087/2019. This Court
allowed the said CRP.No.100087/2019 by order dated
- 5 -
06.10.2020 remanding the mater to the Trial Court
directing to dispose of the said application after giving
opportunities to the parties. It was made clear in the said
order that the parties to appear before the Trial Court on
02.11.2020 at 11:00 a.m. without expecting any fresh
summons or notice in the matter. After the remand, the
matter was taken up by the Trial Court on 02.11.2020,
both the counsel for the parties were present, the Trial
Court issued court notice to the plaintiffs and defendants
and their advocates returnable by 23.11.2020. Thereafter,
the Trial Court adjourned the matter on three occasions.
The matter was taken up on 02.11.2021, as none
appeared on the said date, the matter was adjourned to
25.11.2021
and
thereafter
04.12.2021.
Again
on
04.12.2021 none appeared, the matter was taken up at
03:20 p.m., on which day the counsel for the petitioner
herein (defendant No.1 in the proceedings therein) sought
for time to submit his argument, as no sufficient ground
was furnished by the petitioner herein, the Trial court
passed the order.
- 6 -
Thus, the Trial Court passed the impugned
order allowing the application, deleting the property
number
as
CTS.No.823/10/A-3
and
inserting
as
CTS.No.832/10/A-3.
Aggrieved
by
the
same,
the
petitioners are before this Court.
Sri.
Laxman
T.Mantagani,
learned
counsel
appearing for the petitioners reiterating the grounds urged
in the memorandum of petition submits that despite the
direction given by this Court, the Trial court has not
afforded sufficient opportunity before disposing of the
application.
It
is
contended
that
there
was
no
typographical or clerical error in the memorandum of
plaint and the decree, as such, application under Section
152 of CPC could not have been entertained that too
without affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioners.
Thus, he submits that there is illegality and irregularity
committed by the Trial Court seeking allo