IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOs.42442-443 OF 2014 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
1. SMT. D. JAYAMMA W/O LATE T.N.LAKSHMINARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT #347, II A MAIN, VII A CROSS, M.E.S. ROAD, MUTHYALANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 054.
2. SRI.L.SHIVAKUMAR S/O LATE T.N.LAKSHMINARAYANA, AGED ABOAUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT #347, II A MAIN, VII A CROSS, M.E.S. ROAD, MUTHYALANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 054.
… PETITIONERS (By Mr. GOPI N. ADV. FOR SRI.C.T.PARAMESHWRAPPA, ADV.) AND:
1. SRI. T.N. CHANDRAPPA S/O LATE NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, RESIDING AT #336/A, VII CROSS, III MAIN, M.E.S. ROAD, MUTHYALANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 054.
2. SMT.CHANDRAKUMARI W/O LATE T.N.NARASIMHA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT QUARTERS NO.747, B./E.L. QUARTERS, NAGALAND CIRCLE, BANGALORE-560 054.
3. SRI.T.N.KIRAN S/O LATE T.N.NARASIMHA MUJRTHY, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT QUARTERS NO.747, B.E.L. QUARTERS, NAGALAND CIRCLE, BANGALORE-560 054.
4. SMT.G.REVAMMA W/O LATE T.N.RANGARAMAIAH, AGED ABOAUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.337, III MAIN, VII CROSS, MUTHYALANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 054.
5. SRI.T.R.PREMNATH S/O LATE T.N.RANGARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.337, III MAIN, VII CROSS, MUTHYALANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 054.
6. SRI.T.R.GAJENDRAGOPAL S/O LATE T.N.RANGARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.337, III MAIN, VII CROSS, MUTHYALANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 054.
7. SRI.T.R.CHETHAN S/O LATE T.N.RANGARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.337, III MAIN, VII CROSS, MUTHYALANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 054.
8. SMT.NANJUNDAMMA SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS 8(a) SRI.JAGANNATH P.N., S/O NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, RESIDING AT GAYATHRI NILAYA, HANUMANTHANAGAR, A.D.COLONY, PAVAGADA-5713 102.
TUMKUR DISTRICT.
9. SRI.UGRAIAH S/O LATE GAVI RANGAIAH, AGED ABOAUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT THOGARIGATTA, KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT KALLABORANAHALLI, DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK-571 301 TUMKUR DISTRICT.
10.SRI.K.G.KUMAR S/O LATE GAVI RANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT THOGARIGATTA, KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT KALLABORANAHALLI, DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK-571301 TUMKUR DISTRICT.
… RESPONDENTS (By Mr.G.S.PATIL ADV. FOR R4- R7 (ABSENT) Mr.SHWETHA ANAND ADV. FOR R9 & R10 (ABSENT) SMT.M.B.CHANDRACHOODA ADV. FOR R9 & R10 (ABSENT)) - - -
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE CASE OF THE PETITIONERS.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.Gopi N., for Mr.C.T.Parameshwarappa, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The writ petitions are admitted for hearing.
With consent of the parties, the same are heard finally.
3. In these petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 06.08.2014 by which application preferred by the petitioner under Order I Rule 10 (2) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’ for short) has been allowed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that while passing the impugned order, the Trial Court has failed to assign any reasons.
5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The impugned order reads as under:
“I.A.No.VI filed under Order I Rule 10 (2) of CPC filed by the applicants by name Ugraiah and K.G.Kumar is hereby allowed and the applicants are impleaded as respondent Nos.9 and 10. The petitioners are directed to carry out the necessary amendment in the cause title.”
6. Thus, it is evident that while passing the impugned order and allowing the application under Order I Rule 10(2) of the Code the Trial Court has failed to assign any reasons. The impugned order cannot be sustained in the eye of law as the same suffers from the vice of non-application of mind. Accordingly, it is quashed. The Trial Court is directed to decide the application filed by respondent Nos.9 to 10 before the Trial Court afresh by a speaking order in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS