Remanded

Smt Chandrika Honnappa v. Sri K Krishnamurthy

Karnataka HC22 Nov 2022WP/17633/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, addressing a Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, ordered the Additional District and Sessions Judge to decide the petitioner's application to come on record as a legal heir before hearing the merits of the main appeal.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's application to come on record in R.A. No.116/2018 was directed to be decided on its merits by the appellate Court before the appeal was taken up on merits.

Smt Chandrika Honnappa Vs Sri K Krishnamurthy — Succession and Inheritance | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.17633/2022 (GM-CPC)

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

SMT. CHANDRIKA HONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS W/O DR H HONNAPPA NO.330, 15^TH CROSS 2^ND BLOCK, JAYANAGARA BENGALURU-560011.

¶8

... PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. RAMESHCHANDRA, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND :

¶11

SRI K KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS S/O VENKATANARYANA,

¶12

SRI SUBBALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS W/O K BHASKAR,

¶13

SRI PADMAVATHI AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS W/O K PRASAD,

¶14

SRI SATHYANARAYANA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O BULLABBAYE

¶15

¶16

SRI ANANTHALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS W/O N SATHYANARAYANA,

¶17

SRI RAMAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS S/O N SATHYANARAYANA,

¶18

SRI N VENKATESHWARA RAO AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS S/O N RAMA RAO

¶19

SRI N SUBBARAO AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS S/O N RAMA RAO,

¶20

SRI K SATHYANARAYANA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS S/O K VENKATANARAYANA

¶21

RESPONDENT 1 TO 9 ARE RESIDING AT HOSAKERE CAMP GANGAVATHI TALUK RAICHUR DISTRICT-583227.

¶22

Y PUTTANNA

¶23

S/O LATE YELE NIRVANA SETTY SINCE DEAD

¶24

10 SRI MANJUNATHA S/O LATE APPAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

¶25

SRI SOMASHEKAR @ SOMASUNDAR S/O LATE APPAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,

¶26

GANGADHAR S/O LATE APPAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,

¶27

¶28

Y R JAYASHEKAR S/O LATE Y RAJASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

¶29

BABU S/O THAMMANNA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

¶30

RESPONDENTS NO. 10 TO 14 ARE RESIDING AT NO.321, 14^TH CROSS 2^ND BLOCK, JAYANAGARA BENGALURU-560011.

¶31

THAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA RESIDING AT KURUDU SONNENAHALLI VILLAGE BIDARAHALLI HOBLI BANGALORE EAST TALUK-560049.

¶32

N VISHWANATHAM DEAD BY HIS LRS

¶33

N SATHYANARAYANA S/O LATE N VISHWANATHAM MAJOR IN AGE

¶34

N VENKATESHWARA RAO S/O LATE N VISHWANATHAM MAJOR IN AGE

¶35

SATHYAVATI W/O LATE N VISHWANATHAM MAJOR IN AGE

¶36

RAMALAKSHMI D/O LATE N VISHWANATHAM MAJOR IN AGE

¶37

¶38

SUNDARAMMA D/O LATE N VISHWANATHAM MAJOR IN AGE

¶39

PADMAVATHI D/O LATE N VISHWANATHAM MAJOR IN AGE RESIDING AT HOSAKERE CAMP GANGAVATHI TALUK RAICHUR DISTRICT-583227.

¶40

... RESPONDENTS

¶41

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH OBSERVATION IA 6 FILED BY THE IMPLEADING APPLICANT WILL KEPT OPEN AND IT WILL CONSIDER ALONG WITH THE MERITS.AT ANNEXURE-A ORDER PASSED BY THE VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE,BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE DATED 23.03.2022 IN RA.NO.116 OF 2018 AND DIRECT THE APPELLATE COURT TO DISPOSE OF THE APPLICATION IA NO.6 PRIOR TO HEARING THE APPEAL ON MERITS OF THE CASE.

¶42

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶43

O R D E R

¶44

The petitioner's application to come on record in R.A. No.116/2018 on the file of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru [for short, ' the appellate Court' ] is not decided

¶45

¶46

and the appellate Court by its order dated 23.03.2022 has observed that this application is kept open to be considered along with the merits of the appeal.

¶47

Sri. Rameshchandra, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that Sri. Puttanna’s suit in O.S. No.180/2004 for declaration is decreed on 23.07.2018, and this judgment and decree is called in question in the appeal in R.A. No.116/2018 before the appellate Court. Sri. Puttanna has died on 30.09.2018, and on his demise, the petitioner has filed application under Order XXII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 along with the other applications to come on record as Sri Puttanna’s legal heir. Sri. Puttanna has admittedly died without children and the petitioner is Sri. Puttanna's brother's daughter. Sri. Puttanna has executed his last Will and Testament bequeathing the subject property in the petitioner’s favour.

¶48

¶49

Sri. Rameshchandra further submits that the

¶50

appellate Court will have to decide whether Sri. Puttanna's suit for declaration is rightly decreed and if there is any decision against Sri Putanna, the petitioner, because she claims rights to the subject property as his legatee and has the benefit of the succession certificate in P & SC No.11/2019, would be affected. The appellate Court has kept the application open for consideration along with the merits, but the adjudication will not be complete unless the petitioner's case is considered. This Court, on a careful consideration, is of the considered view that the appellate Court must be called upon to decide on the merits of the petitioner's application [I.A. No.6] before the appeal is taken up on merits. Hence the following:

¶51

ORDER

¶52

The petition stands disposed of calling upon the VI Additional District and Sessions

¶53

¶54

Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru to decide on the merits of the petitioner's application [I.A. No.6] in R.A. No.116/2018 in accordance with law.

¶55

Sd/JUDGE

¶56

AN/-

Smt Chandrika Honnappa v. Sri K Krishnamurthy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Chandrika Honnappa v. Sri K Krishnamurthy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Thakranaika Vs the President

Ibibo Group Private Limited Vs Economic Transport Organization Ltd.

C. S. Chandrashekar Vs Sri. Krishnappa

Punjab National Bank Vs Rajya Vakaligara Sangha

Sri B R Chiranth Vs Smt B R Manjula

Shivalingaiah Vs Smt Suvarnamma