Defendants in a partition suit challenged an interlocutory order directing tenants to deposit rent in court, relying on a Will in their favour. The High Court held the Will was yet to be proved and the trial court had rightly secured the rents, and dismissed the writ petition.
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 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 14506 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
W/O ATAUR REHMAN AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT 2ND MAIN, 3RD CROSS, AZAD NAGARA, CHITRADURGA-577501.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. KANTHARAJAPPA M.G., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
NC: 2024:KHC:44867 WP No. 14506 of 2024
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF IDGA MOHALLA, 3RD CROSS, MEDEHALLI ROAD, CHITRADURGA-577501.
…RESPONDENTS
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED 1ST ADDL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHITRADURGA IN O.S. NO.163/2022 DATED 20.03.2024 ON IA-4 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
ORAL ORDER
The defendant Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.163/2022 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Chitradurga (henceforth referred to as 'Trial Court' for short) have filed this petition challenging an order dated 20.03.2024 by which, the tenants under the defendant Nos.1 and 2 in item No.3 property were directed to deposit the rent before the Court.
suit schedule properties. The plaintiffs claimed that the suit item Nos.1 and 3 were owned and possessed by Mr. D.Abdul Razak, while item No.2 was owned and possessed by late Khamarunnisa. They contended that they were residing in suit item Nos.1 and 2 and were sharing the rents received from item No.3. They contended that they came to know that the defendants were attempting to get the khatha of the suit item No.3 transferred to their names based on some unconscionable documents. Therefore, they sought for partition and separate possession of their share in the suit properties.
(ii) The defendant Nos.1 and 2 contested the suit inter alia contending that the suit item No.3 was bequeathed to them by their father in terms of a testament dated 13.09.2012 which was duly registered and after death of their father, they succeeded to item No.3 and were enjoying the rents.
(iii) With these contentions, the Trial Court set down the case for trial. At the stage of evidence of the parties, the plaintiffs filed an application under Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code for a direction to the defendant Nos.1 and 2 to deposit the rent received from the tenants in suit item No.3.
The said application was contested by the defendant Nos.1 and 2 on the ground that they had become the owners of the suit item No.3 in view of the Will dated 13.09.2012 executed by their father and therefore they have every right to receive the rents. The Trial Court after considering the contentions of both the parties held that Will set up by the defendant Nos.1 and 2 was yet to be proved and since the ownership of Mr. D.Abdul Razak in suit item No.3 was not in dispute, the defendant Nos.1 and 2 cannot alone usurp rents earned from the suit item No.3. Consequently, it allowed the application directing the tenants under the defendant Nos.1 and 2 in item No.3 to deposit the rent into the Court.
the father of the defendants was the owner of suit item No.3 and he had lawfully executed a Will dated 13.09.2012 in favour of defendant Nos.1 and 2. He submits that there are other properties where the plaintiffs could claim their share. He contends that the tenants were not arrayed as parties to the
suit and therefore, there could be no direction to the tenants to deposit the rent.
counsel for the defendant Nos.1 and 2.
NC: 2024:KHC:44867 WP No. 14506 of 2024
Hence, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE
HJ
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31
1 issue framed by the court
Whether tenants in a partition suit item could be directed to deposit rents with the trial court pending proof of a Will set up by the defendants.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
UMME SALMA
RESHMA BANU
AMJAD BASHA
ANSAR BASHA
ADIL BASHA
ANWAR BASHA
R. NATARAJ
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
