Disposed

M D Kalasappa v. Thripuranthraiah M D

Karnataka HC13 Jun 2024WP/32349/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of two writ petitions under Article 227 challenging compromise decrees in temple procession disputes. The court held that civil courts lack jurisdiction due to the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997, directing the petitioner to approach the Deputy Commissioner or Endowment Tribunal instead.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions disposed; pending I.A.s closed; no specific relief granted as petitions did not proceed to merits.

M D Kalasappa Vs Thripuranthraiah M D — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:21080 WP No. 32349 of 2018 C/W WP No. 32350 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 32349 OF 2018 (GM-CPC)

¶7

C/W

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 32350 OF 2018 (GM-CPC)

¶9

IN W.P.NO.32349/2018

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

M. D. KALASAPPA, S/O. M.K. DEVANNA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O. MOOGURU VILLAGE & POST, T.NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571 124.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI. ABUBACKER SHAFI, ADVOCATE)

¶14

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

AND:

¶16

THRIPURANTHRAIAH M. D., S/O. LATE DODDADEVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,

¶17

SUNDARAPPA M.D., S/O. CHIKKADEVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,

¶18

JAYASHEKHARA M.D., S/O. LATE M.K.DEVANNA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:21080 WP No. 32349 of 2018 C/W WP No. 32350 of 2018

¶21

M.D.RAJASHEKAR, S/O. LATE M.K.DEVANNA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

¶22

SOMASHEKARA, S/O SUNDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,

¶23

NAGARAJAMURTHY, S/O. B.M. ESHWARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

¶24

NANJUNDASWAMY, S/O. B.M.DEVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

¶25

LOKESH, S/O. PARAMESHWARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,

¶26

ALL THE ABOVE RESPONDENTS ARE R/O. MOOGURU VILLAGE & POST, T. NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571 124.

¶27

…RESPONDENTS

¶28

(BY SRI. B.L. SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND 2; SRI. SHIVANANDA D.S., ADVOCATE FOR R4; R3(B), 5 AND 7 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; SRI. PRATHAP K.C., ADVOCATE FOR R6; VIDE ORDER DATED 04.09.2023 SERVICE OF NOTICE IS HELD SUFFICIENT IN R/O R1(A), R1(C), R1(D), R3(A))

¶29

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS TAKEN PLACE IN O.S.NO.7/2012 BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC AT T.NARASIPURA AT ANNX-E AND ITS CONSEQUENTIAL MEMORANDUM OF MEDIATION AGREEMENT U/SEC.89 CPC R/W. RULES 24 AND 25 OF THE KARNATAKA CIVIL PROCEDURE (MEDICATION RULES 2007) VIDE ANNX-F AND ETC.

¶30

¶31

NC: 2024:KHC:21080 WP No. 32349 of 2018 C/W WP No. 32350 of 2018

¶32

IN W.P.NO.32350/2018

¶33

BETWEEN:

¶34

M. D. KALASAPPA, S/O. M.K. DEVANNA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O. MOOGURU VILLAGE & POST, T. NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT - 571 124.

¶35

…PETITIONER

¶36

(BY SRI. ABUBACKER SHAFI, ADVOCATE)

¶37

AND:

¶38

JAYASHEKHARA M.D., S/O. LATE M.K. DEVANNA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

¶39

M.D. RAJASHEKAR, S/O LATE M.K. DEVANNA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,

¶40

BOTH THE ABOVE RESPONDENTS ARE R/O. MOOGURU VILLAGE & POST, T. NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT - 571 124.

¶41

…RESPONDENTS

¶42

(R1(A) AND R1(B) ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; BY SRI. SHIVANANDA D.S., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶43

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS TAKEN PLACE IN O.S.NO.16/2012 BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AT T.NARASIPURA VIDE ANNX-B AND ITS CONSEQUENTIAL MEMORANDUM OF MEDIATION AGREEMENT U/SEC.89 CPC R/W. RULES 24 AND 25 OF THE KARNATAKA CIVIL PROCEDURE (MEDIATION RULES 2007) VIDE ANNX-C AND ETC.

¶44

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:21080 WP No. 32349 of 2018 C/W WP No. 32350 of 2018

¶45

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRILIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶46

ORDER

¶47

The present Writ Petitions are filed questioning the compromise decree passed in O.S.No.7/2012 before the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC at T.Narasipura Taluk dated 15.12.2012 and O.S.No.16/2012 before the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) at T.Narasipura Taluk dated 15.12.2012.

¶48

It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed the suit before the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC at T.Narasipura Taluk seeking the relief of permanent injunction restraining the respondent Nos.4 to 8 from interfering with the performance of puja in the plaint schedule mentioned goddess Sri. Thripurasundrammanni temple.

¶49

It is the case of respondent Nos.1 to 3 that they are the hereditary Archakas of the temple, respondent Nos.1 to 3 and their predecessors are performing the puja’s for the period of 31 days in every Calendar years commencing from 1^st January to 31^st January. It is stated that the Tahsildar had

¶50

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:21080 WP No. 32349 of 2018 C/W WP No. 32350 of 2018

¶51

authorized the persons to perform the puja and there was an obstruction from the defendants therein, they have filed the suit. The written statement is filed by the defendants therein. It is the case of the petitioner that he also belongs to the Archaka family and the respondents have filed a collusive suit and prayed for a compromise decree and it is submitted that as such, the order is obtained by fraud and the compromise decree needs to be quashed.

¶52

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now, because of the said orders passed by the Court below, he is not permitted to do puja in the temple. As the said order is obtained by fraud, the same has to be set aside.

¶53

The whole dispute is between the Archakas and who has to perform the puja’s in the temple. The present suit i.e., O.S.No.7/2012 how it is entertained before the Court below is not known to this Court. The Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997 the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is ousted. Section 68 of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable

¶54

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:21080 WP No. 32349 of 2018 C/W WP No. 32350 of 2018

¶55

Endowments Act, 1997 bars the jurisdiction of the Civil Court which is inserted by Act No.27/2011.

¶56

The present suit is filed in the year 2012, any of their disputes which can be effectively dealt with by the authorities under the Act and the remedy is provided under Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997, the Civil Courts have no jurisdiction. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the action of any of the respondents that they have not permitting him to do Archakatvam and he belongs to the hereditary Archaka Family, his remedy is to approach the Deputy Commissioner under the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997. If any dispute is questioned or allowed and if it is beyond the jurisdiction of the Deputy Commissioner, he has the remedy to approach the Endowment Tribunal which can look into all these issues. Now, the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable and he is at liberty to avail the alternative remedies available to him under the provisions of the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997.

¶57

¶58

NC: 2024:KHC:21080 WP No. 32349 of 2018 C/W WP No. 32350 of 2018

¶59

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is ' disposed of '. All the

¶60

pending I.A’s are closed.

¶61

SD/JUDGE

¶62

BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20

M D Kalasappa v. Thripuranthraiah M D

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M D Kalasappa v. Thripuranthraiah M D

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

B.A. Vani Vs S Srikanth

T N Nandish Kumar Vs Gagana Gowda

Mr M Mehta Mahesh Vs Mrs Jayashree Chandrakant

Mr.Vishal Narayan Patil Vs Smt.Deepthi Wilson R

Smt. Lakamma Vs Babu

Sri N Narendra Babu Vs Smt M Lalitha Reddy