Dismissed

Mallappa S/O Siddappa Hanchinal Since Deceased by His Lrs v. Shri Shivaputra S/O Halappa Hanchinal

Karnataka HC8 Dec 2023WP/106873/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the trial Court's order allowing the impleadment of two alleged legal heirs in a partition suit. The Court held that the disputed question of fact regarding other heirs was not for it to decide under Article 226, though it clarified that any genuine legal heir remains entitled to apply for impleadment.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. Dismissal does not prevent potential legal heirs from applying for impleadment in the underlying partition suit.

Mallappa S/O Siddappa Hanchinal Since Deceased… — Succession and Inheritance | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:14398 WP No. 106873 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 106873 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MALLAPPA S/O. SIDDAPPA HANCHINAL, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.

¶10

SMT. RATNAWWA W/O. MALLAPPA HANCHINAL, AGE: 82 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. HULLOLLI-591 305,

¶11

TALUK: HUKKERI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶12

ROHAN HADIMANI T Digitally signed by ROHAN HADIMANI T

¶13

SHRI HALAPPA S/O. MALLAPPA HANCHINAL, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HULLOLLI-591 305, TALUK: HUKKERI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶14

SMT. MAHADEVI D/O. MALLAPPA HANCHINAL, AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HULLOLLI-591 305, TALUK: HUKKERI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶15

SHRI SIDDAPPA S/O. MALLAPPA HANCHINAL, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HULLOLLI-591 305, TALUK: HUKKERI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶16

…PETITIONERS

¶17

(BY SMT. SUNANDA P. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶18

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14398 WP No. 106873 of 2023

¶19

AND:

¶20

SHRI SHIVAPUTRA S/O. HALAPPA HANCHINAL, AGE: 73 YEARS,, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HULLOLLI-591 305, TALUK: HUKKERI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶21

SMT. BASAWWA W/O. SIDAGOUDA PATIL, SINCE DECEASED BY HER LRS.

¶22

SHRI GURUSIDDA S/O. SIDAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 72 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. NEAR KOTABAGI CANAL, HULLOLLI-591 305, TALUK: HUKKERI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶23

SHRI BABU S/O. SIDAGOUD PATIL, SINCE DECEASED BY HER LRS.

¶24

SMT. MANJULA W/O. BABU PATIL, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. HULLOLLI-591 305, TALUK: HUKKERI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶25

SMT. SHIVALEELA NAGAPPA PATIL, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. SUNAGAR GALLI, GOKAK, NOW AT HULLOLLI-591 305, TALUK: HUKKERI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶26

SMT. GEETA W/O. CHANDRAKANT GUDDI, AGE: 40 YEARS,OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. HULLOLLI-591 305, TALUK: HUKKERI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶27

SHRI BALAPPA S/O. RAMAPPA BENADI, AGE: 69 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. JANATA PLOT, HARUGERI-591 220, TALUK: RAIBAG, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶28

¶29

NC: 2023:KHC-D:14398 WP No. 106873 of 2023

¶30

SHRI ISHWAR S/O. RAMAPPA BENADI, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.

¶31

SHRI ANAND S/O. ISHWAR BENADI, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HANUMAN NAGAR, BELLAD BAGEWADI-591 305, TALUKA: HUKKERI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶32

SMT. LAXMIBAI W/O. SHIVAPPA BENADI, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. JANATA PLOT, HARUGERI-591 220, TALUKA: RAIBAG, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶33

SMT. KASHAWWA W/O. MALLAPPA SOLLAPURE, SINCE DECEASED.

¶34

SHRI MAHADEV S/O. MALLAPPA SOLLAPURE, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HARUGERI-591 220, TALUKA: RAIBAG, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶35

SMT. SATYAVVA W/O. DUNDAPPA KHOT, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHHOLD WORK, R/O. NIDASOSHIWADI-591 236, TALUKA: HUDDERI, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI.

¶36

SMT. DUNDAWWA @ DADDAWWA IRAPPA HIPPARAGI, SINCE DECEASED BY HER LRS.

¶37

SHRI HANAMANTH S/O. IRAPPA HIPPARAGI, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. NEAR YAMAKANMARDI ROAD, BELAGALI-587 113, TALUK: MUDHOL, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT.

¶38

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14398 WP No. 106873 of 2023

¶39

SHRI SHRISHAIL S/O. IRAPPA HIPPARAGI, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE, R/O. NEAR YAMAKANMARDI ROAD, BELAGALI-587 113, TALUKA: MUDHOL, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT.

¶40

SMT. MANJULA IRAPPA HIPPARAGI, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. NEAR YAMAKANMARDI ROAD, BELAGAGI-587 113, TALUK: MUDHOL, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT.

¶41

…RESPONDENTS

¶42

(NOTICE TO R2 TO R13 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶43

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226

¶44

AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 13.09.2023 ON I.A. I IN FDP 4/2021 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUKKERI.

¶45

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS

¶46

DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶47

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14398 WP No. 106873 of 2023

¶48

ORDER

¶49

The petitioners in the instant writ petition have challenged the order passed on I.A.No.I in FDP.No.4/2021 by the Civil Judge and JMFC., Hukkeri (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’). In the said proceedings, it is submitted that respondent No.6 therein died. Hence, respondent No.1 herein made an application to implead legal heirs of respondent No.6 therein. The petitioners herein filed objections contending that all the legal heirs of respondent No.6 have not been sought to be made parties to the proceedings and only two persons are sought to be impleaded. The trial Court on the ground that petitioners apart from making a bald allegation have not produced any document to show that there are other legal heirs of respondent No.6 therein as contended by them who are to be made parties, the objection of petitioners has been overruled and the interlocutory application filed by respondent No.1 herein has been allowed and the persons

¶50

6 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14398 WP No. 106873 of 2023

¶51

sought to be impleaded by respondent No.1 herein has been directed to be impleaded in the FDP proceedings.

¶52

Admittedly, if there are any legal heirs to respondent No.6 therein, they are all entitled for a share out of the property which is allocated to the share of respondent No.6 therein and the right of petitioners will not be affected.

¶53

The trial Court based on the evidence placed before it has come to the conclusion that there are only two legal heirs of deceased respondent No.6 therein and has allowed the application. The trial Court has not believed that there are other legal heirs as contended by the petitioners herein. The question involves disputed question of facts which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Under the circumstances, the writ petition has to be rejected. However, this will not come in the way of any legal heirs of the deceased respondent No.6 who are left out to make an application for

¶54

7 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:14398 WP No. 106873 of 2023

¶55

impleadment in the FDP proceedings and establish the fact that they are the legal heirs of the deceased respondent No.6 therein and if they are able to establish the same, the trial Court will be bound to implead them. Hence, the following:

¶56

ORDER

¶57

The writ petition is dismissed. However, dismissal of the writ petition will not preclude any person making an application in FDP.No.4/2021 before the Civil Judge and JMFC., Hukkeri claiming to be the legal heirs of the deceased respondent No.6 therein. If such an application is made, the trial Court is bound to consider the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders and if it comes to the conclusion that they are indeed legal heirs of the deceased respondent No.6 therein irrespective of the order passed in I.A.No.I in FDP.No.4/2021, the trial Court is bound to implead them as parties to FDP.No.4/2021.

¶58

Sd/JUDGE

¶59

¶60

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9

Mallappa S/O Siddappa Hanchinal Since Deceased by His Lrs v. Shri Shivaputra S/O Halappa Hanchinal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mallappa S/O Siddappa Hanchinal Since Deceased by His Lrs v. Shri Shivaputra S/O Halappa Hanchinal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Giriyappa Mallappa Magi, Vs the State of Karnataka

Ningappa Neelakanthappa Uppal Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Totaba S/O. Appasab Ingle Vs Shri Balu S/O. Khandu Bhojane

Mr. Mukesh Harjivandas Patadia Vs Induslnd Bank Ltd. Ltd.

M/S P.C. Guddad and Sons Vs the Joint Director (Planning)

Basappa B Yattinagudda Vs the State of Karnataka