Disposed

Thippavva Alias Hemakaksi Nilugal v. Shekappa S/O Irappa Sunkad

Karnataka HC3 Apr 2024WP/101899/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition seeking mandamus to direct the trial court to decide a pending application for clubbing two suits involving same parties and subject matter, noting that mere pendency does not warrant High Court intervention.

What did the court decide?

Disposal of the writ petition with liberty to move the trial court for consideration of the application.

Thippavva Alias Hemakaksi Nilugal Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6092 WP No. 101899 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF APRIL, 2024 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 101899 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

THIPPAVVA @ HEMAKSHI NILUGAL, W/O. IRAPPA, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. B N. JALIHAL, TQ: HUNGUND,

¶6

DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶7

SOMALINGAPPA S/O. BASAPPA SUNKAD, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O NIMBALAGUNDI, TQ: : HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶8

SMT. BASAMMA ALIAS NIRMALA, W/O. BASAVARAJ BISHETTI, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O KUNABENCHI, TQ: HUNAGUND DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶9

CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed byCHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2024.04.08 15:02:15 +0530

¶10

IRANNA S/O. BASAPPA SUNKAD, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. NIMBALGUNDI, TQ: : HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶11

NAGARAJ S/O. BASAPPA SUNKAD, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. NINBALAGUNDI, TQ: : HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI SHIVARAJ P. MUDHOL, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

SHEKAPPA S/O. IRAPPA SUNKAD, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O KALLIGUDDI, TQ: HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN: 587201.

¶16

SHIDDAPPA S/O. IRAPPA SUNKAD, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

¶17

- 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6092 WP No. 101899 of 2024

¶18

R/O. KALLIGUDDA, TQ: HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN: 587201.

¶19

SMT. NEELGANGAVVA W/O. BASAPPA SUNKAD, AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. NIMBALAGUNDA, TQ: HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN: 587201.

¶20

SANGAPPA S/O. BASAPPA SUNKAD, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O NIMBALGUNDI, DIST: HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN: 587201.

¶21

SHEKAPPA S/O. BASAPPA SUNKAD, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O . NIMBALGUNDI, TQ: HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN: 587201.

¶22

MAHANTESH S/O. BASAPPA SUNKAD, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O NIMBALGUNDI, TQ: HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN: 587201.

¶23

SHIVANAND S/O. BASAPPA SUNKAD, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O NIMBALGUNDI, TQ: HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN: 587201.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE TRIAL COURT I.E. ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT HUNAGUND TO DISPOSE OF THE IA NO.XXV IN O.S. NO.304/2012 FILED BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-E AND TO DISPOSE OF THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶26

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,

¶27

THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6092 WP No. 101899 of 2024

¶29

ORDER

¶30

This writ petition is filed seeking for following relief:

¶31

“To issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing the trial court i.e. Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Hunagund to dispose of the IA no.XXV in O.S. no.304/2012 filed by the Petitioner vide ANNEXURE-E and to dispose of the same in accordance with law.”

¶32

Sri Shivaraj P.Mudhol, learned counsel for

¶33

petitioners submitted that petitioners were plaintiffs in OS no.304/2012 filed for relief of declaration etc. It was submitted that respondents-defendants therein had filed OS no.62/2015 during pendency of plaintiffs’ suit. Since subject matter of both suits was same property between same parties, plaintiffs had filed IA no.25 for clubbing of OS no.304/2012 with OS no.62/2015. It was submitted that though application was filed on 18.11.2023, till date, said application was not considered. It was submitted that since both suits were between same parties and regarding same subject matter, trial of both suits together was necessary to avoid conflicting evidence and findings. Failure to consider would therefore be not justified.

¶34

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and perused writ petition record.

¶35

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6092 WP No. 101899 of 2024

¶36

It is settled legal position that no writ can be issued, merely, on ground that an application is filed and same has been pending for about 3-4 months could not be a cause for approaching High Court for issuance of a direction. Material on record would not indicate that application is being pressed.

¶37

Under circumstances, writ petition stand disposed of

¶38

reserving liberty to petitioners to move trial Court for consideration of application.

¶39

Sd/JUDGE

¶40

VMB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16

Thippavva Alias Hemakaksi Nilugal v. Shekappa S/O Irappa Sunkad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thippavva Alias Hemakaksi Nilugal v. Shekappa S/O Irappa Sunkad

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

Smt. Rekha W/O Maruti Hundre Vs the State of Karnataka

Huzur Ahamad Naik S/O Mohammad Nazir Ahamad Vs the City Municipal Council

Muragesh S/O Gurunath Goraguddi Vs the State of Karnataka

Nagappa S/O Malappa Hire Kurubar Vs Ramappa S/O Pujarappa Hire Kurubar

Sri. Ningappa S/O Govindappa Ningaraddi Vs Sri Yallappa S/O Shingadeppa Hirekumbi

Dr. Suresh S, S/O K.H. Shesha Naik Vs District Election Officer and