IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.15155/2015 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
PUTTALAKSHMAMMA W/O DODDAVEERAIAH MAJOR, RESIDING AT SEEBI THOTA BEHIND TUMKUR AMANIKERE TUMKUR SINCE DEAD BY L.Rs.
1. SRI T B ANANTHKUMAR S/O PUTTALAKSHMAMMA D/O DODDAVEERAIAH AGED 43 YEARS R/O SEEBETHOTA BEHIND TUMKUR AMANIKERE TUMKUR SINCE DEAD BY HIS L.Rs 1(A). SMT. RATNA W/O. LATE T.B. ANANTHKUMAR, AGED 31 YEARS.
1(B). SRI KEERTHI KUMAR T A S/O. LATE T.B. ANANTHKUMAR, AGED 21 YEARS.
1(C). CHAITHRA T.A., D/O. LATE T.B. ANANTHKUMAR, AGED 18 YEARS.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT SEEBETHOTA, BEHIND TUMKUR AMANIKERE, TUMKUR.
2. SMT T N TULASIDEVI W/O VENKATACHALAIAH AGED 50 YEARS C/O NAGANNA BUILDING D NO.695, GANESHWA SAW MILL ROAD, T DASARAHALLI BANGALORE.
3. SMT T B KAMALA W/O KRISHNAPPA 46 YEARS , R/AT NO.322 NEAR SHIVAJI DEPOT 1ST MAIN ROAD T DASARAHALLI BANGALORE 4. T B LOKESH S/O PUTTALAKSHMAMMA D/O DODDAVEERAIAH AGED 41 YEARS R/AT DASANAPALYA CHIKKABANAVARA BENGALURU. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI M B CHANDRA CHOODA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI.T.R.JAYANNA S/O LATE HUVADIGARA RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS R/O BEHIND ALASETTIKERE UPPARAHALLY MAJARE TUMKUR TUMKUR SINCE DEAD BY L.Rs 1(A). SMT.SHARADAMMA W/O LATE T.R.JAYANNA, AGED 50 YEARS, 1(B). SRI NAGARAJU S/O LATE T.R.JAYANNA, AGED 30 YEARS, 1(C) SRI UMESH S/O LATE T.R.JAYANNA, AGED 2930 YEARS, 1(D) KALAVATHI D/O LATE T.R.JAYANNA, AGED 26 YEARS, 1(E) ARUNA D/O LATE T.R.JAYANNA, AGED 21 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF ARASETTIKEREPALYA, BEHIND RAMAKRISHNA ASHRAMA, THOTADAMANE, AMARJYOTHINAGARA, TUMAKURU.
2. SMT S K KALAVATHI W/O S N SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS NO.643, 12TH CROSS 5TH MAIN, M C LAYOUT VIJAYANAGARA BANGALORE – 560 040 3. SRI A CHANDRAPPA S/O LATE ANJANAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS DEVEERAPALLI VILLAGE & POST HOSUR, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT TAMILNADU STATE 4. SRI J B VASANTHAKUMAR S/O R BASAVARAJ AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS NO.1106, ASHOKNAGAR EXTENSION TUMKUR TOWN … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. VISHWANATH SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 (A-E); SRI N. SURESHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R3 IS H/S V/O DATED 11/01/2016; NOTICE TO R4 IS H/S V/O DATED 16/10/2019) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 27.03.2015 PASSED ON IA FILED U/O 1 RULE 10 R/W ORDER 22 RULE 10 AND SECTION 151 OF CPC R/W SECTION 52 OF T.P. AND 19(B) OF SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT IN OS 162/2000 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & CJM, TUMKUR, VIDE ANNEXURE-H BY ISSUE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioners who are the plaintiffs before the trial Court have challenged the order at Annexure-H, whereby the trial Court has dismissed the application filed by the petitioners under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Order 22 Rule 10, Section 151 of CPC, to implead respondent No.4 herein, who is stated to be an agreement holder with respect to the same property executed by respondent No.1 on 08.09.2014.
2. It is contended that the subsequent agreement holder would be proper party, if not a necessary party and all interested parties are required to be heard as the present proceedings would have an impact on the rights of other agreement holders. It is also submitted that in light of the necessity to avoid multiplicity of legal proceedings including litigation initiated by persons having interest in the property including agreement holders, who are not made parties in the present petition, it would be appropriate that the said respondent No.4 be impleaded in the present proceedings.
3. The trial Court has rejected the application primarily noticing that the suit is of the year 2000 and there has been delay. It is to be noted that delay itself could not be the sole reason for rejection of the application, nevertheless, it is clear that a case has been made out for consideration which would have required the trial Court to issue notice to the proposed impleading applicant and then pass an order after hearing the parties. It cannot be said that in light of contentions raised there was no ground for even issuing notice on the said application.
4. Accordingly, in light of contentions raised, the impugned order at Annexure-H is set aside. The trial Court is to issue notice on Interlocutory application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Order 22 Rule 10, Section 151 of CPC, to implead the 4th respondent herein and consider the said application and pass orders in light of contentions raised by the parties in accordance with law. Taking note that the suit is filed in the year 2000, the trial Court to expedite the matter.
The writ petition is disposed of. In light of disposal of petition, no orders are required to be passed on I.A.1/2015 and accordingly, I.A.1/2015 is disposed of as requiring no further orders.
Sd/- JUDGE VP