IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.40801 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN K.M.RAVINDRA, S/O LATE B.K.MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT KUMBENA AGRAHARA VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, KADUGODI POST, BANGALORE – 560057. … PETITIONER (BY SRI.RAVI KUMAR K.M, ADVOCATE) AND 1. SMT.SUSHEELAMMA, W/O MUNIKARAGAPPA, AGED ABOTU 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT SAGARAMANGALA VILLAGE, KADUGODI POST, BANGALORE – 560057.
2. KRISHNAPPA, S/O LATE MUNIKULLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, 3. SRI.VENKATESH, S/O KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 4. SRIDEVI, W/O LATE MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 4 ARE RESIDING AT KUMBENA AGARAHARA VILLAGE, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, KADUGODI POST, BANGALORE – 560057. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K.S.MAHADEVAN, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4; R1 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED ON I.A.NO.II IN O.S.NO.506/2014 DATED 14.6.2018 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE UNDER ANNEXURE-D TO THE WRIT PETITION AND THEREBY ALLOWING I.A.NO.II UNDER ORDER I RULE 10(2) R/W SECTION 151 CPC AND TO IMPLEAD THE PETITIONER AS DEFENDANT IN THE SUIT AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING – B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner being the intending defendant in a declaration suit in O.S.No.506/2014, is knocking at the doors of writ court for assailing the order dated 14.6.2018, a copy whereof is at Annexure – D whereby the learned II Addl. Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, has rejected his impleading application filed under Order I Rule 10(2) of CPC 1908, on the ground that he is neither necessary a nor proper party to the suit in question.
2. After service of notice, the respondent Nos.2 to 4 having entered appearance through their counsel, resist the Writ Petition. The 1st respondent-plaintiff though served with the notice has chosen to remain unrepresented.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition Papers, this court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner happens to be a proper party if not a necessary party, for the adjudication of the suit in question inasmuch as prima facie he would be affected by the decree if made as sought for and therefore, he needs to be permitted to be arrayed as 5th defendant to the suit;
4. Even otherwise also, the impleading of the petitioner as one of the defendants to the suit would not in any way affect the interest of the original parties to the suit; conversely the impleadment of the petitioner as a defendant would facilitate a final and effective adjudication of the lis in the suit.
In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition succeeds; impugned order is set aside; subject application having been favoured, petitioner is permitted to enter the suit fray as the 5th defendant.
All contentions of the parties are kept open. No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE cbc