IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION No.39505/2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
1. JAYAMMA, W/O. LATE SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT BANANDUR VILLAGE AND POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK & DISTRICT – 562 151.
2. CHANDRAIAH, S/O. LATE SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT BANANDUR VILLAGE AND POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK & DISTRICT – 562 151.
3. BYRAPPA, S/O. LATE SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT BANANDUR VILLAGE AND POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK & DISTRICT – 562 151.
4. RAMESH, S/O. LATE SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT BANANDUR VILLAGE AND POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK & DISTRICT – 562 151.
5. GANGADHARAIAH.G.S., S/O. LATE SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT BANANDUR VILLAGE AND POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK & DISTRICT – 562 151.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI.C.R.SUBRAMANYA, ADV.) AND:
SRI.SIDDAPPA @ PUTTASWAMAIAH, S/O. LATE JOGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE, BIDADI POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK & DISTRICT-562 151.
… RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE & CJM AT RAMANAGARA IN O.S.NO.4/18 ON IA NO.3 DTD 30.05.2018 VIDE ANNX-D AND TO ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO COME ON RECORD AS DEFENDANTS 5 TO 9 IN THE SAID SUIT WITH COSTS THROUGH OUT.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Petitioners have assailed the order dated 30.05.2018 passed on I.A.No.3 in O.S.No.4/2018 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and CJM at Ramanagara.
2. The respondent herein filed O.S.No.4/2018 before the trial Court seeking partition and to allot the plaintiff’s share in the suit property with separate metes and bounds. In the said proceedings, I.A.No.3 has been filed by the petitioners herein under Order 1 Rule 10 (2) read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure to implead the proposed applicants as proposed defendant Nos.5 to 9 in the suit.
3. The trial Court has observed that item No.5 of the plaint schedule is described as Sy.No.124/11A and that was the subject matter of the suit in O.S.No.163/2003 and R.A.No.40/2010. In the said suit filed by the father of the applicants for partition and separate possession claiming share in Sy.No.124/11A measuring 3 acres 8 guntas situated at Gollahalli village, the share of the plaintiff was allotted to an extent of 6 guntas as the plaintiff is claiming share in the said property. The applicants are neither necessary nor proper parties to the suit. In the circumstances, the applicants again proposing to come on record as defendants in the suit filed by the plaintiff claiming right on item No.5 of the plaint schedule is not justifiable. The reasoning of the trial Court cannot be held to be untenable. No jurisdictional error found in the order impugned.
Writ petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE VM