On 18.04.2023 I, along with my sister and mother, filed Writ Petition No.9545 of 2023 in the High Court of Karnataka. We filed this seeking the quashing of the entire fraudulently instituted civil proceedings. On the grounds inter alia of fraudulent filing, fabrication of order of cognisance, forging of signatures of Judges, evidence tampering etc.
Respondent No.6 [M.Amaranath KAR/4790/1999], Respondent No.7 [N.S.Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy KAR/3540/2005] and Respondent No.8 [K.N.Somaiah KAR/197/1984] in this Writ Petition are advocates. The Constitution of India, under Article 21, guarantees the right to a fair trial. Yet, what I have experienced is the compromise of this right. One of the grounds we stand on is the violation of Article 21 since a fake advocate filed and prosecuted this original suit. The problems I detail below is the result of allowing fake advocates to practice in the courts. I detail the nuanced ways in which complicity allows for the infringement of the right to a fair trial and the right to access justice.
| PETITIONERS | RESPONDENTS |
|---|---|
| 1. RASHMI MUNIKEMPANNA | 1. NAGARAJ S/O DODDANNA |
| 2. SUSHEELA V [Represented by Rashmi Munikempanna] | 2. M.S.KRISHNAPPA |
| 3. SHILPA MUNIKEMPANNA | 3. B.MUNISWAMY GOWDA |
| 4. M.VINAY KUMAR | |
| 5. K.SHEKARARAJU | |
| 6. M.AMARANATHA | |
| 7. N.S.VIJAYA BHASKAR REDDY | |
| 8. K.N.SOMAIAH |
Beginnings of Writ Petition No.9545/2023
| PLAINTIFFS | DEFENDANTS |
|---|---|
| 1. NAGARAJ S/O DODDANNA | 1. SUSHEELA V |
| 2. M.S.KRISHNAPPA | 2. SHILPA MUNIKEMPANNA [04.03.2023] |
| 3. B.MUNISWAMY GOWDA | |
| 4. M.VINAY KUMAR | |
| 5. K.SHEKARARAJU |
On 25th October 2010, M.Amaranatha [KAR/4790/1999] and N.S.Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy [KAR/3540/2005], on behalf of Nagaraj and 4 others filed an original suit for specific performance against my mother on our home. They filed this in the court of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District at Bengaluru.
In April of 2022 my sister and I stumbled on a series of investigative articles. These detailed the fact that the Presiding Officer Dr.A.Gurumurthy of the XIV A.C.M.M, Mayo Hall, Bengaluru unearthed a 15,000 crore “scam”. Two criminal complaints were filed against my mother in this same court. Following on, on investigating the documents in the civil proceedings we arrived at the same conclusions. Indeed, the Original Suit too was fraudulently filed. Hence we filed Writ Petition No.9545 of 2023, in the High Court of Karnataka seeking the quashing of the entire civil proceedings.
Our Legal Representation
Legal Counsel represented my mother for 10 years in this 13 year trial.
2020 onwards: I represent her in person in the trial court proceedings. I have filed an application to do the same in the High Court of Karnataka and the Supreme Court of India.
Problems in Writ Petition No.9545/2023
Scrutiny Objections
This Writ Petition underwent scrutiny 5 times. They raised new objections on whim and fancy as seen in the court order sheet on the left. As a result the Scrutiny branch refused to post it to Party-in-Person committee. We subsequently made several complaints. Thereafter I filed an application which is pending for enquiry and disciplinary action.
Rule 14(3) Chapter XII The High Court of Karnataka Rules 1959: :
14.(3) Once a list is put up/published as provided in sub-rule (1), no requisitions or defects shall be added and if it is found necessary to add additional requisitions or defects, matter shall be re-notified by publishing a list and an additional period of four weeks shall be available for compliance with requisition or rectification of objections, as the case may be, from the date of publication of such list on the official website of this Court.
Refusal to Allow for Application for Certified Copy
CERTIFIED COPY
The Certified copying branch refused to allow me to apply for a certified copy of the final order of dismissal dated 12.07.2023. But accepted Respondent No.1 Nagaraj’s application. I did file a complaint with the Registrar-General of the High Court of Karnataka agitating the same. There has been no response.
LAW
Rule 1(1) Chapter XVII The High Court of Karnataka Rules 1959:
1.(1). Parties to a proceeding in the High Court shall be entitled as of right to apply for and receive certified copies of all pleadings, judgments, decrees or orders and all documents and depositions of witnesses made or exhibited in the said proceeding.
Dismissed then Revoked
DISMISSAL/NOTICE
The then Presiding Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar dismissed Writ Petition No.9545/2023 on 12.07.2023 in open court. It reflected as pending on 13.07.2023. On 14.07.2023 I became aware that there was an order to issue notice dated 12.07.2023. I am currently challenging this in the Supreme Court of India.
Rule 10, Chapter VIII The High Court of Karnataka Rules 1959: :
10. Every Writ Petition as early as possible after it has been admitted to register, shall be posted before the appropriate Bench for preliminary orders as to issue of notice. The Bench after hearing the petitioner or his counsel if he appears, may either dismiss the petition summarily or order issue of notice to the respondent calling upon him to appear on a day named in the notice to show cause why the application should not be granted.
Listed without an Order
On 16.11.2023 I received a call from the Court Office stating that there were directions from the Bench to list the Writ Petition for hearing. They asked me to submit a memo for listing. Which I couldn’t do.
The Writ Petition was listed on 17.11.2023. For hearing on an application for listing that I had filed on 23.06.2023. And here’s the even more interesting part – this is an already disposed off application. When Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar had dismissed the Writ Petition 12.07.2023 he had also disposed off 3 of my applications.
So in effect the current Bench having the Roster passed orders on an application that had already been disposed off!!
You can read about the issues we face in the Supreme Court of India on our Special Leave Petition. We filed this challenging the order of revocation without notice to Petitioners.
Writ Petition No.12079 of 2023 High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru
Petitioner Nagaraj, Son of Doddanna, filed this Writ Petition, challenging interim orders, impleading my sister, passed on Original Suit No.964 of 2010 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District. We filed Writ Petition No.9545/2023 seeking to quash this same case. The High Court dismissed this Writ Petition with directions.
Scrutiny Objections
Even though there were glaring scrutiny issues including non-impleading of necessary parties this sailed through. Nagaraj filed this matter on 07.06.2023. It was listed before a Bench for hearing on 10.07.2023. Dismissed the same day. With a direction to expedite the trial proceedings. By the same Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar who dismissed and revoked Writ Petition No.9545/2023.
Application under S.340 Code of Criminal Procedure
My sister filed an Interlocutory application, dated 02.08.2023, seeking the institution of criminal proceedings, under Sections 193 and 209 of the Indian Penal Code against the Petitioner. On account of false claims and for submitting false documents into the High Court of Karnataka. Not yet listed.
Rule 10 Chapter XV High Court of Karnataka Rules, 1959:
10.(1) Interlocutory Applications shall be posted for preliminary or interim orders ordinarily within a week of their presentation.