High CourtsSingle Bench(2025) 01 KAR CK 1604

Sadashivappa S. vs G.P. Parvathamma & Ors

Karnataka High Court, Principal Bench · Decided on 17 January 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
N.V. Anjaria, CJ · K.V. Aravind, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 24801 Of 2024 (GM-CPC)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 449 words

E.S. Indiresh, J

1.

In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 05th August, 2024 (Annexure-A) passed in Original Suit No.274 of 2020 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC., Challakere (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'Trial Court'), wherein the application IA.No.5 filed by the petitioner herein under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure came to be rejected.

2.

It is the case of the petitioner that the plaintiffs have filed Original Suit No.274 of 2020, seeking relief of partition and separate possession in respect of the suit schedule properies. In the said suit, the petitioner herein had filed application IA. No.5 under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to implead him as defendant No.4 in the suit for effective adjudication of the suit on the ground that, one of the properties mentioned in the schedule land bearing Survey No.89/2 measuring 2 acres situate at Gosikere Village, Parasurampura Hobli, Challakere Taluk has been given to the petitioner. The Trial Court, after considering the material on record, by order dated 05th August, 2024, dismissed the application filed by the petitioner with cost of Rs.200/-. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner presented this writ petition.

3.

Heard Sri. Kiran Kumar H., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

4.

Sri. Kiran Kumar H., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein is the son of defendant No.1 and the land bearing Survey No.89/2 has come to the share of the petitioner herein and therefore, he argued that the finding recorded by the Trial Court in the impugned order requires to be interfered with in this writ petition.

5.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and on careful examination of the impugned order dated 05th August, 2024 passed in Original Suit No.274 of 2020 by the Trial Court, the same would indicate that the plaintiffs have filed Original Suit No.274 of 2020, seeking relief of partition and separate possession in respect of the schedule properties. The petitioner claims to be the son of the defendant No.1. Therefore, unless the rights of parties is crystallized in the said suit with regard to the share of the defendant No.1 in respect of the suit schedule properties, the petitioner herein cannot claim exclusive right in respect of the land bearing Survey No.89/2 of Gosikere Village, Parasuramapura Hobli, Challakere Taluk without ascertaining the lawful title in respect of the schedule property. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed as devoid of merits.