Basavamurthy Madara Channaiah Swamigalu Vs G N Murali Krishna

BASAVAMURTHY MADARA CHANNAIAH SWAMIGALU S/O DURGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT MADARACHANNAIAH MUTTA DEVANAGERE ROAD, N H NO.4, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT- 561202.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. RUDRABHUSHAN C B.,ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

G N MURALI KRISHNA S/O G H NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

¶14

Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH

¶15

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

G N MUKUNDA S/O G H NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

¶17

G N SUJATHA D/O G H NARASIMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

¶18

G N YASHODA D/O G H NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

¶19

G N NALINI

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:47343 WP No. 32193 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

D/O G H NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

¶24

G N CHAKRAVARTHI S/O G H NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,

¶25

G N KUBERA S/O G H NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

¶26

RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 7 ARE R/AT NO.36, JANATHA COLONY, JYOTHI NAGARA, HORAMAVU AGARA, HORAMAVU POST, BENGALURU- 560 043

¶27

THIPPAMMA W/O G H NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT GAJAMARANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT- 572101.

¶28

G H NARASIMHAIAH S/O KARADI HANUMANTHAPPA, R/AT GAJAMARANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT- 572101.

¶29

PURUSHOTHAM S/O G H NARASIMHAIAH, NO.36, JANATHA COLONY, JYOTHI NAGAR, HORAMAVU AGARA, HORAMAVU POST, BENGALURU- 560 043

¶30

MARKANDAMUNI SWAMIGALU S/O LATE ANANDAMUNI, SRI ADIJAMBAVA BRUHAMATA,

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:47343 WP No. 32193 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

DHARMAPURA HOBLI, HIRYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT- 572101.

¶34

N PREMALATHA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, W/O LATE N RAMAPPA,

¶35

M JAMUNA

¶36

AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT KODEHALLI, DHARMAPURA HOBLI, HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT- 577 511

¶37

STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU, REPRESENTED BY

¶38

SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER.

¶39

…RESPONDENTS

¶40

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE XV ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE, BENGALURU TO EXPEDITIOUSLY DISPOSE OF OS.NO.8701/2010 WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE XV ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE,BENGALURU (ANNX-A).

¶41

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶42

ORAL ORDER

¶43

This petition is filed by the petitioner/defendant No.5 for the following reliefs.

¶44

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:47343 WP No. 32193 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

a. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the XV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru to expeditiously dispose of O.S.No.8701/2010 which is pending before XV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (Annexure - A);

¶47

b. Pass any other relief as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstance of the case in the interest of justice and equity.

¶48

This Court does not find the need or necessity to issue notice to respondents, who are the plaintiffs and the co-defendants, before the trial Court, for the reason that this petition is filed for expeditious disposal of the case.

¶49

The only relief that is sought by the petitioner/defendant No.5 in this case is to issue direction to the XV Additional City Civil and Sessions judge, Bengaluru, to expeditiously dispose of O.S No.8701/2010, the suit filed by the plaintiffs for the relief of partition and other reliefs. The suit came to be dismissed for non-

¶50

5 -

¶51

NC: 2025:KHC:47343 WP No. 32193 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

prosecution on 17.03.2017, and thereafter it was restored at the instance of plaintiffs.

¶54

But however, the plaintiffs have been

¶55

protracting and prolonging and dragging the proceedings for one reason or another without adducing evidence or proceeding further in the matter. The plaintiffs are making hectic efforts to prolong and protract the matter with ulterior motives and mala fide intentions without proceeding further in the matter.

¶56

In view of the fact that the suit is of the year 2010 and having been dismissed in the year 2017 and thereafter restored, the plaintiffs should be more diligent and cautious in proceeding further in the matter. But they are not showing any interest, which is causing an enormous amount of delay in the disposal of the suit, as there is no cooperation and deliberate protraction of the proceedings, and Tactics adopted by the plaintiffs. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the petition and direct the trial judge to dispose of the suit

¶57

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:47343 WP No. 32193 of 2025

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

expeditiously in a time-bound manner without further causing delay in the disposal of the suit. Accordingly, I pass the following order.

¶60

ORDER

¶61

The petition is allowed.

¶62

A direction is issued to the XV Additional City

¶63

Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, to dispose of the O.S. No.8701/2010 in an expeditious manner within an outer limit of one year from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

¶64

It is made clear that the trial Court is at liberty to impose exemplary costs on the parties seeking unnecessary adjournments.

¶65

Sd/-

¶66

(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶67

RCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

Basavamurthy Madara Channaiah Swamigalu v. G N Murali Krishna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basavamurthy Madara Channaiah Swamigalu v. G N Murali Krishna

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

Infifrest Foods Limited Vs Youtube Llc

Smt. Mahadevamma Vs Sri. N Siddaraju

Sri Prakash Vs G Francis

Umakka Vs Thippamma

Smt K Accamma Alias Vidya Vs Sri Kavadichanda Bopanna

Mr Henry Coutinho Vs N M a Siddiq