IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.10588 OF 2017 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN SRI.CHANDRASHEKAR, S/O SRI.CHENNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, VEERUPAXPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, AT PRESENT RESIDING AT NO.218, PUNYA, JANAPRIYA ABODES MAIN ROAD, BHEL LAYOUT, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGARA, BANGALORE-560098. … PETITIONER (BY SRI.GIRISHA N.R, ADVOCATE) AND 1. N.N.NAGARAJU, S/O NANJEGOWDA @ NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, 2. S.B.MANJULA, W/O N.N.NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 3. N.PRADEEP KUMAR, S/O N.N.NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT NAGANAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE-57001.
4. SMT.KAMALAMMA, W/O LATE KARIGOWDA, D/O LATE NANJEGOWDA @ NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, RESIDING AT PALAHALLI VILLAGE, BELAGOLA HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571438.
5. SMT.JAYAMMA, W/O NARAYANAPPA, D/O LATE NANJEGOWDA @ NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT HAROHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571434.
6. SMT.SHANTHAMMA, W/O CHIKKAKARIYA, D/O LATE NANJEGOWDA @ NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT HOSAHUNDI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE-57001.
7. SMT.BORAVVA, W/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, RESIDING AT NAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK MYSORE-57001.
8. SRI.KRISHNA, S/O LATE KOMMANA BOREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 9. SRI.CHANNEGOWDA, S/O LATE KOMMANA BOREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESPONDENTS NO.8 AND 9 ARE RESIDING AT SHIVALLI GRAMA, KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK MANDYA-571401.
10. SMT.SUJATHA, D/O LATE KOMMANA BOREGOWDA, W/O MARISIDDA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT GORAVALE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA-571401.
11. SMT.SHANTHA, D/O LATE KOMMANA BOREGOWDA, W/O SRINIVASA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT KYATHANAHALLI GRAMA, KASABA HOBLI, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA-571434.
12. SMT.MANJULA, D/O LATE KOMMANA BOREGOWDA, W/O NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT NAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK MYSORE-57001.
13. SMT.MARIYAMMA, D/O LATE NANJEGOWDA @ NANJAPPA, W/O SOMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.251, NAGANAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE-57001.
14. SMT.SATHYABAMA, W/O SRI.SWAMY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, RESIDING AT YARGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE-57001. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.P.NATARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3; NOTICE TO R-10 IS D/W V/O DATED 17.07.2017; R-4 TO R-9, R-11 TO R-14 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.2.2017 VIDE ANNEX-A PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSORE AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.2.2017 PASSED IN MISC.PETITION NO.144/2015 AND ALLOW THE MISC. PETITION NO.144/2015 AND TRANSFER THE O.S.NO.129/2015 FROM THE FILE OF THE IV ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MYSORE TO PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE, MYSORE AND TO DIRECT FOR CLUBBING O.S.NO.129/15 WITH O.S.NO.389/12 AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING – B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner being one of the defendants in two partition suits i.e., O.S.No.389/2012 and O.S.No.129/2015, is invoking the writ jurisdiction of this court in essence for clubbing of these two suits for the purpose of their trial and common disposal, after setting aside the impugned order dated 13.02.2017, a copy whereof is at Annexure – A whereby his request for the same is rejected by the court below. After service of notice, all the respondents having been served, however, the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 are represented through their counsel who vehemently opposes the Writ Petition.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition Papers, this court is of the considered opinion that both the suits need to be clubbed together for the purpose of common trial and disposal in the light of the law declared by the Apex Court in the case of CHITIVALASA JUTE MILLS VS. JAYPEE REWA CEMENT, AIR 2004 SC 1687.
3. Since both the suits are by the blood relatives, claiming under a common ancestor and one of the properties therein having been bought by the petitioner who happens to be a defendant in both the suits, the clubbing of these suits would serve the cause of the adjudication.
In the above circumstances, the Writ Petition is allowed; the impugned order is quashed; petitioner’s application filed under Section 24 of CPC having been favoured, the suits are directed to be clubbed together for the purpose of common trial and for disposal.
All contentions of the parties are kept open.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE cbc