Dismissed

H.R.Manjesh v. R.Sundramma

Karnataka HC2 Mar 2026WP/27229/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a partition suit, the petitioner sought interim maintenance under Section 151 CPC. The trial court rejected the application, noting revenue records showed the properties stood in the first respondent's name, attracting a Section 14 Hindu Succession Act presumption of self-acquired property. The High Court found no illegality and dismissed the writ petition, directing expeditious disposal of the

What the court decided

AI extract

H.R.Manjesh Vs R.Sundramma — Partition | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:12810 WP No. 27229 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 27229 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

H.R.MANJESH S/O LATE H.H. RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/O HERUR VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK TUMKURU DISTRICT- 572 130.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. N B NIJALINGAPPA., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

R.SUNDRAMMA

¶13

W/O LATE H.H. RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS.

¶14

Digitally signed by DHANALAKSHMI MURTHY Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA

¶15

H.R. VENKATHESHMURTHY S/O LATE H.H. RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.

¶16

H.R. RAGHAVENDRA S/O LATE H.H. RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.

¶17

H.R. PUSHPALATHA D/O LATE H.H. RAMEGOWDA W/O H.D. NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:12810 WP No. 27229 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

ALL ARE R/O HERUR VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK TUMKURU DISTRICT- 572 130.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(R1 TO R4 ARE SERVED)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KUNIGAL ON 13.07.2022 IN O.S. NO.119/2021 REJECTING THE I.A. NO.IV. VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 13.07.2022 passed in O.S. No.119/2021 on I.A. No.4, filed under Section 151 of the CPC, seeking payment of interim maintenance of Rs.20,000/- to the second plaintiff (petitioner herein).

¶28

The plaintiffs filed a suit for partition and separate possession in O.S.No.119/2021 before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Kunigal. During the pendency of the

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:12810 WP No. 27229 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

suit, they filed an application seeking interim maintenance.

¶32

The trial court has given a clear finding that, as per the documents, namely the revenue records, the suit schedule properties except item No.4 therein stand in the name of the first respondent. When the documents stand in the name of a female, there is a presumption under Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act that the said properties are her self-acquired properties, unless the contrary is proved. Furthermore, it has been observed by the trial court that the petitioner has made contradicting contentions regarding the enjoyment of the suit schedule properties.

¶33

At this stage, without a full-fledged trial, it cannot be decided whether the suit schedule properties are joint family properties or not. Therefore, the application for payment of interim maintenance has been rightly rejected by the trial court. There is no error or illegality in the order passed by the trial court.

¶34

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:12810 WP No. 27229 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. The

¶38

trial court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible, and in any event, not later than six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶39

Sd/(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

¶40

CM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 31

H.R.Manjesh v. R.Sundramma

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

H.R.Manjesh v. R.Sundramma

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Siddanna S/O Seerupaiah Vs B Hanumanthappa S/O Sahukara Bommaiah

Smt Shravani N Vs M/S. Karnataka Power Corporation Limited

B. Shankaregowda, Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Prathima Patil Vs Munishamappa

Sri K G Gopal Vs Smt M Vanitha Murthy

M/S Kirti Service Station Vs the Church of South India Trust Association (Csita)