Shri G N Ravishankar Vs Shri G S Suresh Kumar

SHRI G N RAVISHANKAR, S/O LATE G S NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/A NO.46, NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE, GANIGARA PALYA, TALAGATTAPURA POST, BENGAURU - 560 062.

¶10

SHRI G N MAHESHKUMAR, S/O LATE G S NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/A NO.46, NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE, GANIGARA PALYA, TALAGHATTAPURA POST, BENGALURU - 560 062.

¶11

Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

SHRI G N CHETANKUMAR, S/O LATE G S NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/A NO.46, NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE, GANIGARA PALYA, TALAGHATTAPURA POST, BENGALURU - 560 062.

¶13

SMT PARVATHAMMA, W/O LATE G S NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/A NO.46, NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE, GANIGARA PALYA, TALAGHATTAPURA POST, BENGALURU - 560 062.

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. MUNIRAJU V., ADVOCATE)

¶16

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:40349 WP No. 9768 of 2023

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

AND:

¶19

SHRI G S SURESH KUMAR, S/O LATE G S SHANKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/A NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE, GANIGARA PALYA, TALAGHATTAPURA POST, BENGALURU - 560 062.

¶20

SMT JAGADAMBA, W/O SHRI G S SURESHKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/A NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE, GANIGARA PALYA, TALAGHATTAPURA POST, BENGALURU - 560 062.

¶21

SMT G S DIVYA, D/O SHRI G S SURESHKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/A NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE, GANIGARA PALYA, TALAGHATTAPURA POST, BENGALURU - 560 062.

¶22

G S DEEPAK, S/O SHRI G S SURESHKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/A NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE, GANIGARA PALYA, TALAGHATTAPURA POST, BENGALURU - 560 062.

¶23

G S PUNEETH, S/O SHRI G S SURESHKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/A NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE, GANIGARA PALYA, TALAGHATTAPURA POST, BENGALURU - 560 062.

¶24

SHRI G S PRAKASH, S/O LATE SHANKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/A NO.66, SREE LAKSHMI NILAYA,

¶25

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:40349 WP No. 9768 of 2023

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

Y N ANNAIAH ROAD, YALACHENAHALLI, J P NAGAR POST, BENGALURU - 560 078.

¶28

SMT K G SHIVALINGAMMA, W/O SHRI G S PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/A NO.66, SREE LAKSHMI NILAYA, Y N ANNAIAH ROAD, YALACHENAHALLI, J P NAGAR POST, BENGALURU - 560 078.

¶29

P YATEESH KUMAR, S/O SHRI G S PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/A NO.66, SREE LAKSHMI NILAYA, Y N ANNAIAH ROAD, YALACHENAHALLI, J P NAGAR POST, BENGALURU - 560 078.

¶30

P MONISHA, D/O SHRI G S PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/A NO.66, SREE LAKSHMI NILAYA, Y N ANNAIAH ROAD, YALACHENAHALLI, J P NAGAR POST, BENGALURU - 560 078.

¶31

SHRI G C PUTTA MALLAIAH @ B C PUTTA MALLAIAH, S/O LATE CHIKKA HONNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, R/A GEDDALAHALLI VILLAGE, BILLINA KOTE POST, SOMPURA HOBALI NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶32

SHRI CHIDANANDA MURTHY, S/O G C PUTTA MALLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/A GEEDALAHALLI VILLAGE, BILLINA KOTE POST, SOMPURA HOBALI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶33

SHRI PRASANNA KUMAR P,

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:40349 WP No. 9768 of 2023

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

S/O G C PUTTA MALLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/A GEDDALAHALLI VILLAGE, BILLINA KOTE POST, SOMPURA HOBALI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶37

SHRI VIJAYA KUMAR, S/O G C PUTTA MALLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/A GEDDALAHALLI VILLAGE, BILLINA KOTE POST, SOMPURA HOBALI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶38

…RESPONDENTS

¶39

(BY SRI. NAGARAJA.S, ADVOCATE FOR R11 TO R13; R6 TO R8 SERVED - UNREPRESENTED)

¶40

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 06.04.2023 PASSED ON IA NO.2 IN OS NO. 1653/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE IV TH ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DIST AT BENGALURU REJECT THE IA NO.2 WITH COST THE CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED HEREIN AS PER ANNX-J AND ETC.,

¶41

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

¶42

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶43

ORAL ORDER

¶44

This writ petition under article 227 of the Constitution

¶45

of India is filed by plaintiff Nos.1 to 4 with a prayer to quash the order dated 06.04.2023 passed on I.A.No.2 in

¶46

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:40349 WP No. 9768 of 2023

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

O.S.No.1653/2018 by the Court of IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru.

¶49

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners

¶50

and learned counsel for the contesting respondents, namely respondent Nos.10 to 13.

¶51

Petitioners had filed O.S.No.1653/2018 before the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru seeking partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties. Respondent No.10 is the purchaser of certain items of the suit schedule property from the original defendants. Respondent Nos.11 to 13 are the children of respondent No.10. Defendant Nos.1 to 9 had filed a written statement admitting the relationship between the parties and they also had supported the case of the plaintiffs and had sought for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties. Defendant Nos.10 to 13 alone had contested the suit by filing written statement. In the said suit,

¶52

6 -

¶53

NC: 2025:KHC:40349 WP No. 9768 of 2023

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

plaintiffs have filed I.A.No.2 under Order I Rule 10(2) of

¶56

CPC with a prayer to implead two supplemental defendants as defendant Nos.14 and 15 in O.S.No.1653/2018. The said application was also opposed only by defendant Nos.10 to 13 by filing objections. The Trial Court vide order impugned dismissed the said application and being aggrieved by the same, the plaintiffs are before this Court.

¶57

Perusal of the plaint averments would go to show

¶58

that the propositus of the family is one Sri.Sangappa. According to the plaintiff, Sangappa had three sons by name Shankarappa, Gangadhara and Shivanna. Shankarappa had three sons by name Nagaraju, Suresh and Kumara Prakash. Plaintiffs and defendant Nos.1 to 9 are the wife and children of the aforesaid Nagaraju, Suresh and Kumara Prakash. Accordingly to the plaintiffs the suit schedule properties belong to Sangappa and after his death, his children have succeeded to the same and no partition had taken between the children of Sangappa.

¶59

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:40349 WP No. 9768 of 2023

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

It is under these circumstances, the plaintiffs

¶62

have filed application under Order I Rule 10(2) of CPC with a prayer to implead two supplemental defendants namely Gangadhara and Shivanna as party defendant Nos.14 and 15 in O.S.No.1653/2018. The Trial Court without even issuing notice to the proposed supplemental defendants, considering the objection filed by defendant Nos.10 to 13 who are the purchasers of only certain items of suit schedule property has dismissed the application. In my considered view, the Trial Court was not justified in dismissing the application without even hearing the proposed supplemental defendants on the application and more so having regard to the relationship of the proposed supplemental defendants with the plaintiffs and defendant Nos.1 to 9. Under the circumstances, the following:

¶63

ORDER

¶64

(i) The writ Petition is allowed.

¶65

(ii) The impugned order dated

¶66

06.04.2023 passed on the I.A.2 filed by the

¶67

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:40349 WP No. 9768 of 2023

¶68

HC-KAR

¶69

plaintiffs under Order I Rule 10(2) of CPC, filed in O.S.No.1653/2018 by the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Trial Court to consider the application a fresh after issuing notice to proposed supplemental defendants and hearing all the stake holders. Since the suit is of the year 2018, the Trial Court is directed to dispose of I.A.No.2 filed in O.S.No.1653/2018 as expeditiously as possible.

¶70

Sd/-

¶71

(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶72

JUDGE

¶73

KVR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10

Shri G N Ravishankar v. Shri G S Suresh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri G N Ravishankar v. Shri G S Suresh Kumar

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

Smt. Lakkamma @ Lakshmamma Vs Dasappa Dead by His Lrs

Sri Minchelappa Vs Smt. Pushpavathi

Smt Puttamma Vs Siddaiah

Mr Gajandran Murthy Vs Sri Naveen Kumar K

M/S Sundew Properties, Vs Sri. Ronak.R

Sri.M.Narasimha Madhava Bhat Vs Shri Venkataramamna Temple