Disposed¶35

Smt. Manjula v. Smt Sowbhagyavathi

Karnataka HC6 Feb 2025WP/12706/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru (NC: 2025:KHC:5500); WP No. 12706 of 2020 (GM-CPC), decided 06.02.2025 by Hon'ble Smt. Justice Lalitha Kanneganti. Keywords: challenge to Lok Adalat / e-Lok Adalat award; Article 226 versus Article 227 maintainability; conversion of writ petition; O.S.No.324/2020; II Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, K.G.F.; compromise petition and decree dated 19.09.2020; alleged forgery of petitioner's signature except vakalath; petitioner not impleaded; disposal with liberty to convert petition under Article 226; all IAs. closed. No case law relied upon; no costs or quantum awarded.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of permitting the petitioner to convert the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India; all interlocutory applications (IAs.) in the writ petition stood closed. ¶35

Smt. Manjula Vs Smt Sowbhagyavathi — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:5500 WP No. 12706 of 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 12706 OF 2020 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. MANJULA WIFE OF LATE THIMMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1094, FISH LANE BAZAR, MASJID STREET, OORGAUMPET, K.G.F - 563 121

¶9

NOW RESIDING AT C/O T JAYASHREEE NO. 262, 7TH WARD, GULPETE, KOLAR - 563 101.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. SRINIVASAN T, ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AND:

¶14

SMT. SOWBHAGYAVATHI WIFE OF LATE CHADNRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

¶15

SRI. SHIVA SON OF LATE CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS

¶16

SRI GANGA PRASAD SON OF LATE CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:5500 WP No. 12706 of 2020

¶19

SMT. JAYANTHI WIFE OF PARTHIBAN DAUGHTER OF LATE CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS

¶20

SRI. SANTHOSH SON OF LATE CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS

¶21

RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5 ARE RESIDING AT FISH LANE BAZAR MASJID STREET, OORGAUMPET K.G.F - 563 121

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. M.B. CHANDRA CHOODA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5)

¶24

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-CALL FOR THE CONCERNED RECORDS AND ISSUE APPROPRIATE. QUASH ORDER DATED 19.09.2020 PASSED BY THE E-LOK-ADALATH IN THE SUIT BEARING O.S.NO.324/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, K.G.F. VIDE ANNX-A AND ETC.,

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶27

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC:5500 WP No. 12706 of 2020

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

On 04.02.2025, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was present and there was no representation on behalf of the respondents and this matter was directed to be listed as ‘Part-heard’ today. Today, when the matter came up, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the present Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by an order passed by the e- Lok Adalat dated 19.09.2020, whereby the plaintiff and the defendants are permitted to compromise in terms of the compromise petition and it is also observed that the compromise shall not come in the way of any third party claims or acquisitions, boundary dispute, if any, and directed to draw the decree in terms of the joint compromise petition. It is the grievance of the petitioner that she was never made as a party. The signature on all the relevant documents does not belongs to the petitioner except for the vakalath and as such, she has come before this Court by filing a Writ Petition under article 227 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel submits that in the grounds, he has stated that petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India and a Writ Petition is maintainable before this Court.

¶31

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:5500 WP No. 12706 of 2020

¶33

The award of the Lok Adalat can be questioned by the petitioner by filing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India but not under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is at liberty to convert this petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

(i) The Writ Petition is disposed of , permitting the petitioner to convert the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶36

(ii) All IAs., in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶37

SD/(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE

¶38

KA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2 CT: BHK

Smt. Manjula v. Smt Sowbhagyavathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Manjula v. Smt Sowbhagyavathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V S Raghavendra Vs C B Manjunath

Venkatesh Chandrasekhar Ayyar Vs Amuktamalyada Mulakaluri

Sri. Sadanand G Shastri Vs Sri. K. Venkateshwara Prasad

Official Liquidator of United Breweries (Holdings) Limited (in Liquidation) Vs M/S.Mga Lifestyle Pvt. Ltd.

Marianist Trust Vs Sri Thimma Reddy

Smt Nanjamma Vs Smt Mangalagowri