SHUKRADEV ENGINEERS AND DEVELOPERS REPRESENTED BY ITS PROOF MR. KISHORA N. KOKA Vs. SMT. SHYMALA PAI W/O SUBASH CHANDRA PAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition by the defendant is directed against the order dated 17.12.2011 (Annexure C) passed by the Court of the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, in Misc.No. 766/2011.

(2.) I have heard the petitioner who appeared in person and perused the impugned order.

(3.) THE learned Principal City Civil Judge, on consideration of the matter, has rejected the petition by the order impugned herein. It is relevant to refer to the reasoning of the learned Judge at paragraphs 7 to 9 which read as follows: 7. I have perused the petition averments, the objection statement filed by respondent and also perused the copy of the plaint in OS NO. 4784/2000. I have perused the remarks offered by the Presiding Officer of the concerned court. I have also perused the order of the Hon'ble High Court dated 18.11.2011 passed in W.P.No. 40544/2011 (GM -CPC) and W.P.Nos. 41959 -960/2011 (GM -CPC). 8. Looking to the objection statement filed by the respondent in the case, it clearly goes to show that the petitioner herein has filed the petition only to drag on the proceedings of the suit. There is direction given by the Hon'ble High Court in the writ proceedings to dispose off the matter within two months from the date of the order dated 18.11.2011. Considering the remarks offered by the Presiding Officer of the concerned court, it clearly goes to show that the said court has given sufficient opportunity to the petitioner herein to lead his evidence and complete the proceedings. Even then, the petitioner herein has not complied with the direction of the Hon'ble High Court. 9. Therefore, considering the entire materials on record. I am of the opinion that the petitioners have not made out the case to allow the petition and to grant the relief.............................................