High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 09 KAR CK 0084

Sudha Enterprises vs Cave Caterers Private Limited

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 1 September 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 26066 of 2010

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 273 words

A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J.—Respondent has instituted O.S. 6616/2006 against the petitioner on 22.7.2006 with a prayer for specific performance of an agreement dated 23.5.2002 and for permanent injunction. Petitioner/defendant has filed written statement and counter claim on 14.11.2006. Plaintiff has filed a rejoinder on 27.1.2007. Suit was referred to Mediation by the Bangalore Mediation Center on 16.11.2007. Mediation having not materialised, the suit was referred back to the Court on 6.2.2008. Issues in the suit have not been framed and no progress has taken place. The prayer in this writ petition is to direct the Trial Court to dispose of the suit within 3 months:

2.

Perused the writ papers.

3.

Learned Counsel on both sides submit that there is need for early trial and disposal of the suit and assured the Court that, they will extend ready co-operation for the early trial and disposal of the suit by the Trial Court Keeping the said circumstance in view and the nature of claim and counter claim, the writ petition stands disposed of as follows:

Both the parties shall file the draft issues in the Trial Court before 8.9.2010. The Trial Court is directed to frame the issues before 25.9.2010. Plaintiff shall adduce and complete its side of evidence before 20.11.2010. The defendant shall adduce and complete its side of evidence before 18.12.2010. The Trial Court is hereby directed to dispose of the suit within 6 weeks from the date the trial of the suit is completed. The parties shall make arrangement to keep their respective learned advocates present in the Court as and when the matter is taken up for consideration.

Ordered accordingly.