Smt Puttamma Vs Siddaiah

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:40007 WP No. 50220 of 2018

¶2

1 -

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 50220 OF 2018 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT.PUTTAMMA, D/O LATE BYRAPPA, W/O CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 149, RAILWAY GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE, GOLLAHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123.

¶9

Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶10

SMT.SIDDAMMA, D/O LATE BYRAPPA, W/O MUNINARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 11, BEGUR VILLAGE AND POST, KASABA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123.

¶11

SMT.RENUKAMMA, D/O LATE BYRAPPA, W/O NALLARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 24, SULIKERE VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 060.

¶12

SMT.NAGAMMA, D/O LATE BYRAPPA, W/O ANNAPPA,

¶13

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:40007 WP No. 50220 of 2018

¶14

HC-KAR

¶15

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 100, MANGANAHALLI, SULIKERE POST, YESHWANTHPURA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK - 560 022.

¶16

SMT.SAKAMMA, D/O LATE BYRAPPA, W/O RAGHUCHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 87, 7TH CROSS, B.K NAGAR YESHWANTHPURA, BANGALORE - 560 022.

¶17

…PETITIONERS

¶18

(SRI.B.ROOPESH AND SRI.SANDEEP., ADVOCATES)

¶19

AND:

¶20

SIDDAIAH, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS

¶21

1(A) RAJANNA, S/O LATE SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,

¶22

1(B) BHAGYAMMA, D/O LATE SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

¶23

MOOPURAIAH, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS

¶24

2(A) SMT.MUNILAKSHAMMA, W/O LATE MOOPURAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

¶25

2(B) SRI SHIVARAJU @ RENUKA, S/O LATE MOOPURAIAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

¶26

2(C) SRI PARVATHAMMA,

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:40007 WP No. 50220 of 2018

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

D/O LATE MOOPURAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

¶30

2(D) SRI.PUTTANRASAMMA, D/O LATE MOOPURAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,

¶31

2(E) SRI.MOHAN, S/O LATE MOOPURAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,

¶32

PUTTAIAH, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS,

¶33

3(A) SMT.NAGAMMA, W/O LATE REVANASIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

¶34

3(B) SMT.NAGARAJU, S/O LATE REVANASIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,

¶35

SMT.PARVATHAMMA, W/O LATE BYRAPPA, SINCE DEAD, THE PETITIONERS HEREIN ARE THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF DECEASED R4.

¶36

ALL ARE RESIDING AT TALAGUPPE VILLAGE, BIDADI HOBLI - 562 109. RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶37

…RESPONDENTS

¶38

(R1(A) SERVED- UNREPRESENTED; V/O DTD 07.08.2025, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R1(B), R2(A) TO R2(E), R3(A) AND R3(B) IS H/S)

¶39

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-CALL FOR RECORDS IN FDP NO.1/2015 FROM THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR

¶40

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:40007 WP No. 50220 of 2018

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, RAMANAGARA, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT. SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 31.07.2018 PASSED ON I.A. DTD 05.10.2016 FILED UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10 (2) OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE BY DISMISSING THE SAID APPLICATION IN FDP NO.1/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, RAMANAGARA, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT VIDE ANNX-D AND ETC.,

¶43

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

¶44

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶45

ORAL ORDER

¶46

Petitioners are before this Court in this writ petition

¶47

filed under article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking for the following relief's:

¶48

WHEREFORE, the Petitioners pray that, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:

¶49

a) Call for records in FDP.No.1/2015 from the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Ramanagara, Ramanagara District.

¶50

b) Issue any appropriate order or direction or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari and to set aside the impugned order dated 31-07-2018 passed on I.A dated 05-10-2016 filed Under Order 1 Rule 10 (2) of Code of Civil Procedure by dismissing the said application in FDP. No.1/2015 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Ramanagara, Ramanagara District vide Annexure-D,

¶51

c) Grant such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of

¶52

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:40007 WP No. 50220 of 2018

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

the case including the cost of this proceedings, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶55

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶56

Respondents who are served in the matter have remained unrepresented before this Court.

¶57

Brief facts of the case that may be necessary for disposal of this writ petition are, O.S.No.120/1995 was filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein seeking partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties and Smt.Parvathamma, who is the mother of the petitioners herein was defendant No.2 in the said suit. The said suit was decreed on 09.04.2013 holding that the plaintiffs are entitled for 1/5^th share in suit schedule A and B properties. The plaintiffs had thereafter filed FDP.No.1/2015 before the Trial Court and in the said proceeding, petitioners herein had filed an application under Order I Rule 10(2) of CPC with a prayer to implead them as party respondent Nos.3 to 7 to the final decree proceedings. The said application was opposed by the

¶58

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:40007 WP No. 50220 of 2018

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

petitioners in the final decree proceedings by filing objections and vide the order impugned the Trial Court has dismissed the said application. Being aggrieved by the same petitioners are before this Court.

¶61

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that

¶62

suit schedule properties are the joint family properties of the father of the petitioners, namely Late.Byrappa. Therefore along with their mother, even the petitioners have an equal share in the suit schedule properties. They came to know of the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.120/1995 subsequently and thereafter, they have

¶63

filed application to implead them in the final decree proceedings which has been wrongly rejected by the Trial Court. He submits that Smt.Parvathamma has now died on 27.06.2020 and therefore, even otherwise, the petitioners are entitled to be brought on record as the legal representatives of deceased Parvathamma in the final decree proceedings. Accordingly, he prays to allow this petition.

¶64

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:40007 WP No. 50220 of 2018

¶65

HC-KAR

¶66

The material on record would go to show that the

¶67

plaintiffs and Late.Byrappa who is the father of the petitioners herein are brothers. Since Late.Byrappa had died prior to filing of O.S.No.120/1995, his wife Parvathamma was arrayed as defendant No.2 in O.S.No.120/1995 which was filed by the brothers of Late.Byrappa seeking partition and separate possession of the joint family properties which were described in schedule A and B of the plaint in O.S.No.120/1995. The said suit has been decreed and the plaintiffs as well as the branch of Late.Byrappa are held to be entitled for 1/5^th share in the suit schedule A and B properties. According to the petitioners who are the daughters of Late.Byrappa and Smt.Parvathamma who is defendant No.2 in the original suit, they are also entitled for an equal share along with their mother, in the suit schedule A and B properties. It is under these circumstances, they had filed an application to implead them in final decree proceedings. The Trial Court has rejected said application for the reason that head of

¶68

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:40007 WP No. 50220 of 2018

¶69

HC-KAR

¶70

the branch family is already on record and therefore, it is not necessary to implead the junior members of the branch family as party respondents to the proceedings.

¶71

During the pendency of this writ petition Smt.Parvathamma, who is the mother of the petitioners herein, who was defendant No.2 in O.S.No.120/1995 and respondent No.2 in FDP.No.1/2015 has died on 27.06.2020 and therefore, the petitioners herein are entitled to come on record as the legal representatives of deceased Parvathamma in the final decree proceedings.

¶72

According to the learned counsel for the petitioners since there is a stay of further proceedings in final decree proceedings, the petitioners herein who are the legal representatives of Late.Parvathamma are not yet brought on record. Under these circumstances, I am of the opinion that if the prayer made by the petitioners in this petition to implead them as party respondents to final

¶73

9 - NC: 2025:KHC:40007 WP No. 50220 of 2018

¶74

HC-KAR

¶75

decree proceedings is granted the same would serve the ends of justice. Accordingly, the following:

¶76

ORDER

¶77

(i) The writ Petition is allowed.

¶78

(ii) The order dated 31.07.2018 passed

¶79

on the I.A. dated 05.10.2016 filed by the petitioners under Order I Rule 10(2) of CPC, filed in FDP No.1/2015 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Ramanagara is quashed and consequently, the prayer made in the said I.A. is granted and the Trial Court is directed to permit the petitioners to come on record as party respondents in FDP.No.1/2015.

¶80

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶81

KVR

¶82

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

Smt Puttamma v. Siddaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Puttamma v. Siddaiah

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

Mr Raghavendra N Vs Mr Vishnuvardan

Abdul Azeez Vs Mrs Sesi

Manjunath C Vs Smt Nayana C

Smt. Lakkamma @ Lakshmamma Vs Dasappa Dead by His Lrs

Sri Minchelappa Vs Smt. Pushpavathi

Mr G Shankar Vs M/S South India Watch Company Pvt. Ltd.