Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Sri C Ramakrishnaiah Vs Poojari Gowda — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Home
Karnataka HC
2025
Sri C Ramakrishnaiah Vs Poojari GowdaSri C Ramakrishnaiah v. Poojari Gowda

Allowed¶¶42

Sri C Ramakrishnaiah v. Poojari Gowda

Karnataka HC25 Nov 2025WP/557/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

NC: 2025:KHC:48843; WP No. 557 of 2024 (GM-CPC); High Court of Karnataka; decided 25.11.2025 by Hon'ble Mr. Justice S Vishwajith Shetty. Themes: writ under Article 227; impleading applicant / necessary party; application under 'I Rule 10(2) CPC'; P&SC proceedings converted into suit (P&SC.No.5003/2022 re-numbered O.S.No.5003/2022); competing wills — Will dated 11.02.2008 by late Narasegowda claimed by plaintiff/respondent no.1 Poojari Gowda versus Will dated 16.04.2013 by Akkamma forming basis of petitioner's title; prior decree in O.S.No.526/2014 dated 19.02.2018; forum: IV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, sitting at Madhugiri. Outcome: writ petition allowed; order dated 07.09.2023 on IA-1 set aside; impleading prayer granted. No precedents cited or discussed in the judgment.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 07.09.2023 passed on IA-1 set aside; consequently the prayer made in IA-1 granted, i.e., petitioner impleaded as party defendant no.2 in O.S.No.5003/2022.

Why is it important?

The petitioner's presence is necessary in O.S.No.5003/2022 for effective adjudication of the dispute, since the suit property was also the subject matter of O.S.No.526/2014 in which his title to the share of Akkamma was declared. ¶¶41

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 07.09.2023 passed on IA-1 set aside; consequently the prayer made in IA-1 granted, i.e., petitioner impleaded as party defendant no.2 in O.S.No.5003/2022.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's presence is necessary in O.S.No.5003/2022 for effective adjudication of the dispute, i.e., whether the Trial Court was justified in rejecting his IA-1 impleading application.

Court's answer

The petitioner's presence is necessary in O.S.No.5003/2022 for effective adjudication of the dispute, since the suit property was also the subject matter of O.S.No.526/2014 in which his title to the share of Akkamma was declared.

Ratio / Principle

The Trial Court was not justified in rejecting the application (IA-1) filed by the petitioner to implead him as party defendant no.2 in O.S.No.5003/2022.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (GM-CPC) under Article 227 of the Constitution of India allowed by the High Court of Karnataka (S Vishwajith Shetty, J.) by order dated 25.11.2025. Petitioner, decree-holder in O.S.No.526/2014 (decreed 19.02.2018, validating the Will dated 16.04.2013 executed by Akkamma, widow of late Narasegowda), sought impleading as party defendant no.2 in O.S.No.5003/2022 — a suit converted from P&SC.No.5003/2022 concerning an alleged Will dated 11.02.2008 of Narasegowda in favour of respondent no.1. The Trial Court (IV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, sitting at Madhugiri) had rejected IA-1 by order dated 07.09.2023. Holding that the petitioner's presence is necessary for effective adjudication because the suit property was also the subject matter of O.S.No.526/2014, the Court set aside the impugned order and granted the prayer in IA-1.

A

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:48843 WP No. 557 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

WRIT PETITION NO. 557 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

C. RAMAKRISHNAIAH S/O CHANNAKESHAVA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT I DHALLI VILLAGE MADHIGIRI TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 124.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI SANDEEP KATTI, ADV., FOR

SRI YOGANANDA S, ADV.)

AND:

POOJARI GOWDA

S/O PATEL LAKSHMINARAYAN GOWDA

Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS RA/T I D HALLI VILLAGE I DHALLI HOBLI MADHUGIRI TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 124.

SIDDAGANGAMMA W/O K VENAKTASWAMY GEDA BOUT 43 YEARS R/AT NO.3/3, KORAMANGALA ROAD, AUDUGODI OPP KEMEPGOWDA COMMNITYHALL BANGALORE - 560 030.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI SHEKARAPPA, ADV., FOR R-1; R-2 SERVED)

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:48843 WP No. 557 of 2024

HC-KAR

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTILCE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07/09/2023, PASSED BY THE LEARNED IV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE, TUMAKURU, SITTING IN MADHUGIRI, IN OS NO. 5003/2022, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-H.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed with a prayer to set aside the order dated 07.09.2023 passed on IA-1 filed in O.S.No.5003/2020 by the Court of IV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, sitting at Madhugiri.

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

Respondent no.1 herein had filed P & SC.No.5003/2022 before the jurisdictional Court at Madhugiri, and respondent no.2 herein had filed objections in the said proceedings, and therefore, the P & SC proceedings was converted into a suit and re-numbered as O.S.No.5003/2022. In the said suit, petitioner herein had filed IA-1 under I Rule 10(2) CPC with a prayer to implead him as party defendant no.2 in the suit. The said application was opposed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.5003/2022.

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:48843 WP No. 557 of 2024

HC-KAR

The Trial Court vide the order impugned has rejected IA-1 filed

in O.S.No.5003/2022 and being aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this Court.

Perusal of the material on record would go to show that the plaintiff in O.S.No.5003/2022 who is respondent no.1 in this writ petition claims that late Narasegowda who has died on 29.02.2008, during his lifetime had executed a Will dated 11.02.2008 in his favour in respect of the suit schedule properties.

According to the petitioner/impleading applicant, after the death of Narasegowda, his wife Akkamma had succeeded to his property and during her lifetime, she had executed a Will dated 16.04.2013 in his favour. Petitioner had filed O.S.No.526/2014 before the jurisdictional Civil Court at Madhugiri to declare his title over the suit schedule property and also for the consequential relief of permanent injunction. The said suit was decreed on 19.02.2018 and the Will executed by Akkamma W/o late Narasegowda is held to be valid in so far as it relates to bequeathing her share in the suit schedule property.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:48843 WP No. 557 of 2024

HC-KAR

The property which is the subject matter of suit in O.S.No.5003/2022 was also the subject matter of the suit in O.S.No.526/2014. Since the petitioner's title has been declared in the said suit to the extent it related to the share of Akkamma in the suit schedule property, I am of the opinion that his presence is necessary in the present suit for the purpose of effective adjudication of the dispute involved in the suit. The Trial Court, therefore, was not justified in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner to implead him as party defendant no.2 to the suit. Accordingly, the following order:

Writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 07.09.2023 passed on IA-1 filed in O.S.No.5003/2020 by the Court of IV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, sitting at Madhugiri, is set aside. Consequently, the prayer made in IA-1 is granted.

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

KK

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the petitioner's presence is necessary in O.S.No.5003/2022 for effective adjudication of the dispute, i.e., whether the Trial Court was justified in rejecting his IA-1 impleading application.¶¶41
The court held
The petitioner's presence is necessary in O.S.No.5003/2022 for effective adjudication of the dispute, since the suit property was also the subject matter of O.S.No.526/2014 in which his title to the share of Akkamma was declared.ratio¶¶41

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 227¶¶25 Article 227¶¶28
CPCRule 10(2)¶¶30

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 07.09.2023 rejecting IA-1 (impleading application of the petitioner) filed in O.S.No.5003/2022; referred to in ¶¶28 and 42 as passed on IA-1 filed in O.S.No.5003/2020.¶¶28
Court of IV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, sitting at Madhugiri · 07.09.2023
Prior proceeding
Respondent no.1 filed P & SC.No.5003/2022 before the jurisdictional Court at Madhugiri; respondent no.2 filed objections in the said proceedings.¶¶30
Prior proceeding
The P & SC proceedings was converted into a suit and re-numbered as O.S.No.5003/2022.¶¶30
Prior proceeding
In O.S.No.5003/2022, the petitioner filed IA-1 (printed as under 'I Rule 10(2) CPC') praying to be impleaded as party defendant no.2; the application was opposed by the plaintiff.¶¶30
Prior proceeding
Plaintiff (respondent no.1) claims that late Narasegowda, who died on 29.02.2008, during his lifetime executed a Will dated 11.02.2008 in his favour in respect of the suit schedule properties.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
Petitioner (impleading applicant) claims that after the death of Narasegowda his wife Akkamma succeeded to his property and during her lifetime executed a Will dated 16.04.2013 in his favour.¶¶37
Prior proceeding
Petitioner had earlier filed O.S.No.526/2014 before the jurisdictional Civil Court at Madhugiri to declare his title over the suit schedule property and for consequential relief of permanent injunction.¶¶37
Prior proceeding
O.S.No.526/2014 was decreed on 19.02.2018; the Will executed by Akkamma W/o late Narasegowda was held valid in so far as it relates to bequeathing her share in the suit schedule property.¶¶37

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
C. RAMAKRISHNAIAH S/O CHANNAKESHAVA GOWDA¶¶10
SANDEEP KATTI, YOGANANDA S
respondent
POOJARI GOWDA S/O PATEL LAKSHMINARAYAN GOWDA¶¶15
SHEKARAPPA
respondent
SIDDAGANGAMMA W/O K VENAKTASWAMY GEDA¶¶19

Coram

AI extract

S VISHWAJITH SHETTYauthor¶¶26

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 25 Nov 2025 · November
Registered: 4 Jan 2024
Case no.: WP/557/2024
CNR: KAHC010689912023
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
Disposal: ALLOWED
Case type: Writ Petition (GM-CPC)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from S Vishwajith Shetty

H S Jayappa Vs K B Prakash
24 Nov 2025
A Mohammed Rasool @ Mujeeb Pasha Vs Smt. Vageeswari S
24 Nov 2025
Sri Jayarma Vs Smt. G S Uma
24 Nov 2025
Smt. Munirathnamma Vs H T Muniraju
25 Nov 2025
Govindaswamy Vs N. Rajamma
25 Nov 2025
M/S Hajee Ebrahim Sait Wakf Vs M/S Indian Wood and Industries
25 Nov 2025

Cite this judgement

Sri C Ramakrishnaiah v. Poojari Gowda, WP/557/2024 (KA), decided on 25 November 2025.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes3

Constitution of IndiaArticle 227 · Article 227
CPCRule 10(2)

View all statutes

Procedural history8

Order dated 07.09.2023 rejecting IA-1 (impleading application of the petitioner) filed in O.S.No.5003/2022; referred to in ¶¶28 and 42 as passed on IA-1 filed in O.S.No.5003/2020.Court of IV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, sitting at Madhugiri · 07.09.2023
Respondent no.1 filed P & SC.No.5003/2022 before the jurisdictional Court at Madhugiri; respondent no.2 filed objections in the said proceedings.
The P & SC proceedings was converted into a suit and re-numbered as O.S.No.5003/2022.

View full history

Bench / Coram

S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

Parties & counsel