Review petition seeking to revisit an order that dismissed final decree proceedings in a partition suit because the court cannot determine the validity of a registered partition deed. The High Court held review was sought to gain a fresh cause of action and dismissed it.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA REVIEW PETITION NO. 112 OF 2024
IN
W.P.NO.13770/2022 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: high court of karnataka
(BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR .M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
NC: 2024:KHC:44660 RP No. 112 of 2024
S/O. LATE NINGAIAH R/AT NEW EXTENSION, YELEKERI, CHANNAPATNA - 562 160.
…RESPONDENTS
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 19/01/2024 IN WRIT PETITION NO.13770/2024 TO IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS REVIEW PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
ORAL ORDER
Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in WP No. 13770/2022 have filed this petition seeking to review the order dated 19.01.2024 allowing the writ petition, and setting aside the order dated 17.12.2020 passed in FDP.No.2/2010 on the file of the learned Prl.Civil Judge and JMFC, Channapatna, consequently, dismissing FDP No.2/2010.
NC: 2024:KHC:44660 RP No. 112 of 2024
NC: 2024:KHC:44660 RP No. 112 of 2024
5. The suit OS.No.230/2019 was withdrawn as not
pressed during the pendency of the final decree proceedings. When the suit is withdrawn unilaterally without reserving any
liberty in favour of the plaintiffs therein, after lapse of several years the petitioners cannot seek review of the order to get a new cause of action either to revive OS.230/2019 or to file fresh suit challenging the validity of registered partition deed. If the petitioners are advised to initiate any such action before the trial Court, they can do it in accordance with law. But this Court by reviewing the order already passed, cannot give a new lease of life to challenge the registered partition deed in question. The prayer made by the petitioners is outside the scope of review as provided under Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the petition. Hence, the petition is
dismissed.
Sd/(M G UMA) JUDGE
BH
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ order of 19.01.2024 could be reviewed under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC to challenge the registered partition deed after withdrawal of OS.No.230/2019 without reserving liberty.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Gowramma
Smt. Sakamma @ Vijaya
Ningaraju @ Raju
Sri. Channegowda N
Sri. N. Shivaraju
M G Uma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
