IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO.50204/2018 (GM - CPC) BETWEEN:
1. SRI PUTTASWAMY S/O. LATE CHIKKAMAYIGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 2. SRI CHIKKARAJU S/O. SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, 3. SRI MAHADEVAIAH S/O. LATE KALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 4. SRI VENKATESHA S/O. LATE THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 5. SMT. AMMANNAMMA W/O. DODDAMAYIGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 6. SRI CHIKKAHYDAIAH S/O. LATE LINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 7. SMT. SHIVAMMA W/O. THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 8. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O. CHIKKABASAVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT HULIKERE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 434. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI KEMPEGOWDA M.K., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SMT. SHANTHAMMA W/O. PUTTASIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT HULIKERE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 434.
2. K. BELLUR GRAM PANCHAYATH KASABA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 434. REP. BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER. ... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.08.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO.314/2017 PASSED BY IN THE COURT OF IV ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT MADDUR VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND ALLOW THIS WRIT PETITION BY ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.3 FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER ORDER I RULE 10(2) R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC IN O.S.NO.314/2017.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The petitioners have challenged the order dated 14/08/2018, passed on I.A.No.III in O.S.No.314/2017 on the file of IV Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Maddur (“Trial Court” for short), whereby the application filed by the petitioners under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of CPC has been rejected.
2. Respondent No.1/plaintiff filed O.S. No.314/2017 before the trial Court seeking the relief of permanent injunction against respondent No.2/ K.Bellur Gram Panchayath (“Gram Panchayath” for short). In the said proceedings, petitioners herein have filed an application under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of CPC to implead themselves as defendants to the suit. The trial Court considering the material on record dismissed the said application. Hence, this writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the grounds urged in the writ petition and sought for setting aside the impugned order allowing the writ petition.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the plaintiff has instituted the suit claiming herself to be the owner and in possession of the suit property, which is denied by the defendant/Gram Panchayath. It is the contention of the impleading applicants that the panchayath had decided to put up the construction of Ambedkar Bhavana and the plaintiff is in illegal possession. It is alleged that the Gram Panchayath may collude with the plaintiff so as to grab the public property. These averments of the impleading applicants have been considered by the trial Court profusely. Since no relief is claimed against the applicants who are claiming to be public merely on the allegation made by the impleading applicants against the defendant, they cannot be construed as necessary and proper parties for the effective adjudication of the dispute between the parties to the suit.
5. Hence, no jurisdictional error is found in the order impugned. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed as devoid of merits.
Sd/- JUDGE S*