Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2015 B E F O R E THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO.37941/2015 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
MR. SIRAJ REHAMATHULLA AGED 62 YEARS SON OF REHAMATHULLA PRESENTLY RESIDING AT #S-01 SECOND FLOOR, EASTERN COURT NO. 24, COLES ROAD BANGALORE-560 005.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI PADMANABHA V.MAHALE, ADV. FOR M/S. REGO AND REGO, ADVS.)
AND:
MESSRS GOLD ENTERPRISES, A FIRM CONSTITUTED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT,1932 WITH ITS OFFICE AT NO. 79/1, 2ND CROSS LAVELLE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS PARTNER MR MOHAMED SHABBIR.
MR. MOHAMED SHABBIR AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O HAJI ISMAIL SAIT RESIDING AT "GOLD CARAT" CLEVELAND ROAD, FRAZER TOWN BANGALORE-560005
MRS. NIKHAT SHABBIR AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS WIFE OF MOHAMED SHABBIR RESIDING AT " GOLD CARAT" CLEVELAND ROAD FRASER TOWN BANGALORE-560 005
MESSRS SATTVA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED (SATTVA GROUP) A BODY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT 1956 WITH ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 4TH FLOOR SALARPURIA WINDSOR # 3 ULSOOR ROAD BANGALORE-560 042 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR/CHAIRMAN MR BIJAY AGARWAL
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI KAMAL, ADV. FOR M/S KAMAL & BHANU ADVS, FOR C/R1 TO R3 )
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DT.29.8.2015 AT ANNX-A HERETO BY ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.13 FILED UNDER ORDER 16 RULE 6 R/W SECTION 151 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 IN O.S.NO.1202/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DIST., BANGALORE, SIMULTANEOUSLY GRANTING TO THE PETITIONER HIS COSTS, COUNSEL’S FEE AND SUCH FURTHER OR OTHER RELIEFS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT OR THE NATURE OF THE CASE REQUIRES.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3 O R D E R
I.A.No.13 filed under Order XVI Rule 6 CPC by the plaintiff/petitioner in O.S.No.1202/2011 on the file of First Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, having been dismissed by the Trial Judge on 29.08.2015, this writ petition was filed to set aside the said order and grant consequential relief.
I.A.No.12 filed by the plaintiff/petitioner was allowed on 02.07.2015 and a direction was issued to produce the IT Returns of the petitioner and his son Yaseer Siraj, for the assessment years 2007-2008 to 2010-2011. In pursuance thereof, the documents were submitted in a sealed envelope. The envelope was opened and the documents were marked. I.A.No.13 filed was rejected on 13.08.2015 and the order passed thereon having been set aside on 27.08.2015 in W.P.No.34838/2015 and pursuant to the order of remand, the impugned order has been passed.
Sri Padmanabha V.Mahale, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner by referring to the affidavit of Sri Siraj Rehamathulla, filed today, submitted that in view of forwarding of the certified copies of the documents duly indexed, to the Trial Court by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-I-(2)(2), this petition may be allowed and the plaintiff/petitioner may be permitted to mark the certified copies.
Mr.M.G.S.Kamal, learned advocate for the respondent, on the other hand, submitted that there being suspicious circumstances, particularly on account of forwarding of the documents, even after the dismissal of I.A.No.13, the defendant/respondent has objections for marking of the documents, which have been received by the Trial Court, subsequent to the filing of this writ petition.
In view of the subsequent development stated in the affidavit dated 23.09.2015 of Siraj Rehamathulla, filed in this writ petition and the statements made by the
5 learned advocates, noticed supra, the documents sought to be summoned by filing I.A.No.13, having been forwarded to the Trial Court by the Income Tax Officer, there is a need to set aside the impugned order, subject to terms.
In the result, Writ Petition is disposed of, setting aside the order dated 29.08.2015, dismissing I.A.No.13 filed in O.S.No.1202/2011 on the file of First Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District. However, it is unnecessary to pass further orders on I.A.No.13, since the documents sought therein is stated to have been submitted by the Income Tax Officer to the Trial Court.
Since the defendants/respondents have serious objections to the marking of certified copies of the documents sent to the court below, the Income Tax Officer, Ward-I-(2)(2), Bengaluru is directed to produce the original assessment files pertaining to the income tax returns filed by the plaintiff and his son Mr. Yaseer Siraj, for the assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11. The Income Tax Officer or the custodian of the
6 said records, if necessary, may also be examined and cross-examined by the parties. Marking of the documents which have been received by the trial court shall be only after the original files relating to the said assessment years are placed on record of the suit by the custodian. Marking of the records received or any other records, shall be subject to consideration of the objections, as may be lawfully raised by the defendant. The objections of the defendant with regard to the admissibility and relevancy of the documents sent to the trial court by the Income Tax Officer is left open to be considered and decided by the Trial Judge.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE sac*