Disposed

D. Erappa v. D. Nagarajappa

Karnataka HC22 Aug 2024WP/22612/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the first appellate court's order directing them to amend the appeal memo cause title to describe respondents as sons of D.Mahadevappa rather than Siddaiah. The High Court held appellants must reproduce the Trial Court decree's cause title, and that such description creates no admission of paternity; writ petition disposed with clarifications.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with clarification that amending the cause title does not constitute admission of paternity.

D. Erappa Vs D. Nagarajappa — Partition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:33822 WP No. 22612 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 22612 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

D. ERAPPA S/O LATE SRI. D.MAHADEVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 87 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST

¶10

D. REVANASIDDAPPA, S/O LATE SRI. D. MAHADEVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST

¶11

APPELLANTS ARE

¶12

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

R/O DODDABATHI VILLAGE, DAVANAGERE TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT -577 566

¶14

(BY SRI. K. RAGHAVENDRA RAO, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

…PETITIONERS

¶17

D. NAGARAJAPPA S/O LATE SRI. SIDDAIAH @BETHUR SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O DODDABATHI VILLAGE, DAVANAGERE TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT- 577 566.

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:33822 WP No. 22612 of 2024

¶19

D. SIDDAPPA, S/O LATE SRI SIDDAIAH @ BETHUR SIDDAIAH, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS

¶20

SMT. KAVERAMMA, W/O LATE SRI. SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

¶21

SHIVAKUMAR, S/O LATE SRI. SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC PAINTER

¶22

RESPONDENTS NO.2 & 3 ARE R/O DODDABATHI VILLAGE, DAVANAGERE TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577 566

¶23

SMT. ROOPA, W/O SRI. MEGHARAJ, D/O LATE SRI. SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O GUNDAGATTI VILLAGE, HARAPANAHALLI TALUK, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT - 583 137

¶24

SMT. SARVAMMA, W/O LATE SRI. ONKARAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS

¶25

SMT. KUSUMA, W/O LATE SRI. VEERANNA, D/O LATE SRI. B. O. ONKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT 3^RD MAIN, 13^TH CROSS, OPP. JEEVITHA PROVISION STORES, VINOBANAGAR, DAVANAGERE- 577 006

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:33822 WP No. 22612 of 2024

¶27

SMT. REKHA B.O., W/O SRI. P.T. HANUMANTHAPPA, D/O LATE SRI. B.O. ONKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING OPP.SAI MEDICALS ROAD, H.K.R. CIRCLE, NITUVALLI, DAVANAGERE - 577 002

¶28

SRI. B.O. PRAKASH, S/O LATE SRI. ONKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS

¶29

SRI. B.O. YOGESH, S/O LATE SRI. ONKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS

¶30

SRI. B.O. MANJUNATHA, S/O LATE SRI. ONKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

¶31

SMT. SUDHA, W/O SRI. SIDDESH, D/O LATE SRI. ONKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS

¶32

RESPONDENTS NO.7 TO 10 ARE R/O SRIRAMANAGARA, DAVANAGERE - 577 512

¶33

SRI. B.O. UJJESHI, S/O LATE SRI. ONKARAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS

¶34

SMT. PARIMALA, W/O SRI. KALLESHI, D/O LATE SRI. ONKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO.11 AND 12 ARE R/O SARJAPURA, BANGALORE - 562 125

¶35

¶36

NC: 2024:KHC:33822 WP No. 22612 of 2024

¶37

SRI. B.O. SIDDESHI, S/O LATE SRI. ONKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

¶38

SMT. KENCHAMMA, W/O LATE SRI. SHEKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS

¶39

SRI. D. S. RAMESH, S/O LATE SRI. SHEKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

¶40

SRI. D.S. SATISH, S/O LATE SRI. SHEKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

¶41

SRI. SIDDESHI, S/O LATE SRI. KUBERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

¶42

RESPONDENTS NO.13 TO 17 ARE R/O KAKANUR VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577 552

¶43

SMT. JYOTHI, W/O VEERESH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT KALLAVVANAGATHIHALLI VILLAGE, HOLALKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 526

¶44

SMT. LEELA, W/O SRI. KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT KAKANUR VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 577 526

¶45

SMT. SHAKUNTHALAMMA, W/O LATE SRI. RUDRAPPA,

¶46

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:33822 WP No. 22612 of 2024

¶47

D/O LATE SRI. SIDDAIAH @BETHUR SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/AT HARAPANAHALLI, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 583 131

¶48

…RESPONDENTS

¶49

(BY SRI. SRIKANTH PATIL K., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4)

¶50

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DAVANAGERE IN R.A.NO.142/2017 ON I.A.NO.7 DATED 02.07.2024 FOUND AT ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.

¶51

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶52

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶53

ORAL ORDER

¶54

Learned Counsel Sri.Srikanth Patil K., has entered

¶55

appearance for respondents No.1 to 4. Learned Counsel submits that he would also appear for other respondents.

¶56

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:33822 WP No. 22612 of 2024

¶57

The grievance of the petitioners who are the

¶58

appellants in R.A.No.142/2017 is that by virtue of the impugned order dated 02.07.2024 on I.A.No.7 filed at the hands of respondents No.1 to 4 a direction is given by the appellate court to amend the cause title showing the name of the father of respondents No.1 to 4 as Sri.D.Mahadevappa. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that it is the stand of the petitioners who were defendants before the Trial Court that respondents No.1 and 2 herein are not the children of Sri.D.Mahadevappa

¶59

and they are the children of Sri.Siddaiah. The petitioners/ appellants are the children of Sri.D.Mahadevappa. Despite this contention, the suit filed by the respondents for partition and separate possession has been decreed at the hands of the Trial Court. While filing the appeal, the petitioners have shown the name of respondents No.1 and 2 are sons of Sri.Siddaiah.

¶60

Learned Counsel further submits that the appeal

¶61

was filed in the year 2017 and the application in I.A.No.7

¶62

¶63

NC: 2024:KHC:33822 WP No. 22612 of 2024

¶64

was filed by respondents No.1 to 4 herein on 10.11.2023, nearly 5 years after the appeal was filed by the petitioners. Directions are sought in the application to the appellants to mention the name of the father of respondents No.1 and 2 herein in the cause title of the appeal memo as Sri.D.Mahadevappa in the place of Sri.Siddaiah. Learned Counsel therefore submits that when the petitioners have taken a stand in their written statement that respondents No.1 and 2 herein are not the children of Sri.D.Mahadevappa, they should not be compelled to show their father’s name as Sri.D.Mahadevappa. They have rightly shown the name of the father of respondents No.1 and 2 as Sri.Siddaiah having regard to the documents that were tendered in evidence by respondents No.1 to 4 before the Trial Court.

¶65

In the considered opinion of this Court having

¶66

regard to the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure, the petitioners herein, when they filed the regular appeal before the District and Sessions Judge, they should have

¶67

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:33822 WP No. 22612 of 2024

¶68

presented the cause title as was found in the judgment and decree of the Trial Court. They could not have tampered with the description of the cause title as shown in the judgment and decree. Even otherwise, merely because the appellants are compelled to show the name of father of respondents No.1 and 2 as Sri.D.Mahadevappa, that by itself will not bind the appellants that they have accepted that respondents No.1 and 2 are the children of Sri.D.Mahadevappa. Even respondents No.1 and 2 or the other respondents also cannot contend that the petitioners/appellants have accepted that respondents No.1 and 2 herein are the children of Sri.D.Mahadevappa.

¶69

With these clarifications, the writ petition stands

¶70

disposed of .

¶71

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

¶72

DL CT:JL

D. Erappa v. D. Nagarajappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D. Erappa v. D. Nagarajappa

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

H K Prabhulingappa Vs Basavaraj

Salarpuria Hi-Rise Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shri B P Kumar Babu

Sri Santosh M Vs Sri N Hanumantha Reddy

Ganapathi Vs Sri Chikkamadaiah

Sri a v Ravish Vs Sri D B Puttegowda

Puttaraja Vs Subbaiah