Allowed¶57

C Galeppa v. Kumari Sudha Rani

Civil Procedure – Correction of final decree – S.152 r/w S.151 CPC

Karnataka HC15 Oct 2025WP/104576/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Section 152 CPC; Section 151 CPC; correction of final decree; typographical error; F.D.P. No.06/2019; preliminary decree in O.S.No.10/1999; partition shares; Nagamma; W.P.Nos.107636-107637/2014; Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Hagaribommanahalli; certiorari under Articles 226 and 227; writ petition (GM-CPC); High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad; Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde; property bearing No.321; Ballari.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; order dated 27.02.2025 in F.D.P. No.06/2019 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Hagaribommanahalli quashed; I.A.No.1/2023 allowed; Trial Court directed to make necessary corrections in the final decree. ¶57

C Galeppa Vs Kumari Sudha Rani — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:13915 WP No. 104576 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 104576 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

C. GALEPPA S/O. S. NAGAPPA, AGE. 69 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. RAMANAGAR-583 212, TQ. HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI, DIST. BALLARI.

¶9

C. CHANDRAPPA S/O. S. NAGAPPA, AGE. 65 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. RAMANAGAR-583 212, TQ. HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI, DIST. BALLARI.

¶10

CHANDRASHEKARLAXMANKATTIMANI Digitally signed byCHANDRASHEKARLAXMANKATTIMANILocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKADHARWAD BENCHDate: 2025.10.1807:57:08 +0100

¶11

C. RAMANNA S/O. S. NAGAPPA, AGE. 63 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. RAMANAGAR-583 212, TQ. HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI, DIST. BALLARI.

¶12

C. SRINIVAS S/O. S. NAGAPPA, AGE. 48 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. RAMANAGAR-583 212, TQ. HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI, DIST. BALLARI.

¶13

… PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY MISS KAVITA S. JADHAV, ADVOCATE)

¶15

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC-D:13915 WP No. 104576 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

AND:

¶19

KUMARI SUDHA RANI D/O. C. GALEPPA, AGE. 39 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. MALAPANAGUDI VILLAGE-583 239, TQ. HOSAPETE, DIST. BALLARI.

¶20

KUMARI ASHA RANI D/O. C. GALEPPA, AGE. 38 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. MALAPANAGUDI VILLAGE-583 239, TQ. HOSAPETE, DIST. BALLARI.

¶21

NAGAMMA W/O. C. GALEPPA, AGE. 60 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. MALAPANAGUDI VILLAGE-583 839, TQ. HOSAPETE, DIST. BALLARI.

¶22

… RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY MISS RANJITA G. ALAGAWADI, ADVOCATE)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR DIRECTION OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 27-022025 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI IN FDP.NO.6/2019 ON THE INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1/2023 FILED UNDER SECTION 152 R/W SECTION 151 CPC AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ALLOW I.A.NO.1/2023.

¶25

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

¶26

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC-D:13915 WP No. 104576 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)

¶31

This petition is filed assailing the order dismissing the application for correction of final decree.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

¶33

that the decree passed in O.S.No.10/1999 on the file of Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Hospet, has attained finality and as per the said decree, Galeppa was allotted 1/3^rd share and his two daughters Sudharani and Asharani were allotted 1/3^rd share each.

¶34

Pursuant to the said preliminary decree, Final Decree Proceeding was initiated in F.D.P. No.06/2019 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Hagaribommanahalli. The final decree is drawn, allotting share to Nagamma, wife of Galeppa in respect of property bearing No.321.

¶35

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that Nagamma, the wife of Galeppa was not

¶36

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC-D:13915 WP No. 104576 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

allotted any share in the preliminary decree. However, in

¶40

the Final Decree Proceeding, contrary to the preliminary decree, a share is allotted to Nagamma and this is allotted on account of typographical error. Hence, an application is filed to correct the error. The application is wrongly rejected on the ground that in W.P.Nos.107636-107637/2014, this Court has allotted share to the petitioners in the said petition.

¶41

5. Learned counsel would urge that the petitioners

¶42

in the said petition are different and Nagamma was not the petitioner in the said petition, as such, share could not have been allotted to Nagamma.

¶43

Learned counsel for respondent respondents No.1

¶44

to 3 would contend that the application could not have been rejected and no share is allotted to Nagamma, respondent No. 3.

¶45

This Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records.

¶46

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:13915 WP No. 104576 of 2025

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

It is not in dispute that the decree passed in O.S.No.10/1999 has attained finality. In the said decree, Nagamma was not allotted any share. When the final decree was drawn, a share is allotted to Nagamma though she was not allotted any share in the preliminary decree.

¶49

Moreover, when the application is filed to correct the typographical error, Nagamma did not object.

¶50

The Trial Court proceeded to dismiss the application by misinterpreting the order passed in the W.P.Nos.107636-107637/2014 on the premise that the Writ Petitioners were allotted a share in the said Writ Petitions. It is to be noticed that Nagamma is not a petitioner in the said Writ Petitions. Accordingly, the impugned order has to be set aside.

¶51