Defendants impleaded in a partition suit about 11 years after its filing sought permission to file their written statement; the Trial Court dismissed their application. The High Court set aside that order, allowed the application subject to costs, permitting them to contest the suit on merits.
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 FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
WRIT PETITION NO. 28431 OF 2017 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by PAVITHRA N Location: high court of karnataka
(BY SRI: N. NANJUNDASWAMY, ADVOCATE)
…PETITIONERS
AND:
S/O LATE THIMMAIAH AND SMT. GANGAMMA.
RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 5 ARE RESIDING AT SEEGEHALLI VILLAGE YESHWANTHPURA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE - 560 112.
BANGALORE NOTH TALUK BANGALORE - 562 130.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI: MUNIRAJ N., ADVOCATE FOR SRI: UMASHANKAR .L., ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI: B.C. SRIRAMA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO 5 R2 & 6 - SERVED UNREPRESENTED R7(A & B) & R8 - H/S - V/O DT.22/1/24)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 20.4.2017 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT BANGALORE IN O.S.1321/2005 THEREBY DISMISSING THE APPLICATION I.E., I.A.8 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC SEEKING PERMISSION TO FILE THEIR WRITTEN STATEMENT AND TO CONTEST THE MATTER ON MERITS AT ANNEX-A AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING - B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Defendant Nos.8 and 9 in OS No.1321 of 2005 on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, are impugning the order 20.04.2017 dismissing their application - IA.No.8 filed under Section 151 of CPC seeking permission to file the written statement.
NC: 2024:KHC:5104 WP No. 28431 of 2017
2. Heard Sri N Nanjundaswamy, learned counsel for
the petitioners and Sri N Muniraj, learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the materials on record.
NC: 2024:KHC:5104 WP No. 28431 of 2017
opposing the petition submitted that there is inordinate delay of morethan six months in filing the written statement. The same has not been explained properly. Under such circumstances, the Trial Court was right in dismissing IA.8. It does not call for any interference by this Court. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
said delay of six months in filing the written statement, I deem
it proper to afford an opportunity to defendant Nos.8 and 9 who
are petitioners herein to file their written statement as otherwise, their right to contest the suit itself will be denied. Since the petitioners were impleaded at the instance of the plaintiff after about 11 years of filing of the suit OS No.1321 of 2005, I do not find any reason to form an opinion that allowing application - IA.8 will prejudice the rights of the plaintiff. On the other hand, permitting the petitioners to file written statement will enable the Trial Court to dispose off the suit on merits considering the rival contention of the parties. However, respondent No.1 - plaintiff will be entitled for reasonable cost to be imposed by this Court. Hence, the impugned order rejecting IA.8 calls for interference by this Court.
ORDER
(ii) The order dated 20.04.2017 passed in OS No.1321 of 2005 on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, is hereby set aside.
NC: 2024:KHC:5104 WP No. 28431 of 2017
(iii) Consequently, IA.8 filed under Section 151 of CPC is allowed.
(iv) The petitioners being defendant Nos.8 and 9 are permitted to file their written statement subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to respondent No.1 - plaintiff within 10 days from today, failing which, the petitioners will lose the benefit of this order.
Sd/JUDGE
*bgn/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Trial Court erred in dismissing IA No.8 under Section 151 CPC seeking permission to file written statement after a six-month delay following impleadment as defendants.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt. Puttalakshmamma
Smt. Jayamma
Sri. Narayanappa
Sri. Venkatappa
Gangalakshmamma
Venkateshappa
M G Uma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
