Karnataka High Court
Shri Madhukar S/O Vishnu Desai vs Shri Satish Alleged Adoptive on 31 July, 2024
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10805
WP No. 104516 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
WRIT PETITION NO. 104516 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SHRI MADHUKAR S/O. VISHNU DESAI,
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. DEEPAK GALLI, OLD GANDHI NAGAR,
BELAGAVI-590 016.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ASHWIN C. HUBLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI SATISH ALLEGED ADOPTIVE
S/O. KASTURI MUDAKANNAVAR,
BEFORE ADOPTION
SATISH S/O. SHRIMANDAR MUDAKANNAVAR,
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O. H.NO.1093, ANANTSHAYAN GALLI,
BELAGAVI-590001.
SAROJA
HANGARAKI
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
REP. BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KARANTAKA
DHARWAD BELAGAVI-590001.
BENCH
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
BELAGAVI-590001, COURT COMPOUND, BELAGAVI.
4. THE TAHSILDAR,
BELAGAVI-590001.
5. THE COMMISSIONER,
CORPORATION OF CITY OF BELAGAVI,
SUBHASH NAGAR, BELAGAVI.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10805
WP No. 104516 of 2024
6. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
INSTRUCTIONS, CLUB ROAD,
BELAGAVI-590001.
7. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER,
SAMPIGE ROAD, SADASHIV NAGAR,
BELAGAVI-590001, BELAGAVI(URBAN).
8. THE HEAD MASTER,
GOVERNMENT KANNADA PRIMARY SCHOOL NO.6,
KONWAL GALLI, BELAGAVI-590001.
9. THE HEAD MASTER,
B.K. MODEL HIGH SCHOOL,
STATION ROAD, NEAR BSNL OFFICE,
CAMP, BELAGAVI-590001.
10. THE PRINCIPAL,
BHARATESH I.T.C. COLLEGE,
BASAVAN KUDACHI,
TAL: AND DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VITHAL S. TELI, ADV. FOR C/R1)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE
NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR
ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
05/07/2024, PASSED BY THE LEARNED I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC, BELAGAVI, IN O.S. NO.1335/2023, REJECTING THE I.A. NO.
IV, FILED U/O. I RULE 10 (2) R/W. SEC.151 OF CPC, COPY OF
WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE E AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10805
WP No. 104516 of 2024
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH)
1. Heard the petitioner's counsel and also the counsel appearing for the respondent No.1.
2. In this writ petition, prayer is sought to quash the order dated 05.07.2024 rejecting the application i.e. I.A.No.4 filed by the petitioner filed under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of CPC vide Annexure-A.
3. The contention of the petitioner before the Trial Court while seeking for his impleadment is that he is a bonafide purchaser of an agricultural land bearing R.S.No.1225/1 vide Sale Deed dated 27.02.2023 for a valuable consideration under Annexure-B and also revenue entries are also changed in respect of the said property in his name and he has been in actual possession and enjoyment of the property. It is also his contention that the said land has been bequeathed to his vendor, Miss.Kasturi D/o Payappa Mudakannavar by virtue of -4- NC: 2024:KHC-D:10805 WP No. 104516 of 2024 registered Will dated 27.12.1986, duly executed by the testator Payappa Mudakannavar. The petitioner submits that his vendor Miss.Kasturi is spinster and thus is issueless and Miss.Kasturi D/o Payappa Mudakannavar, being unmarried, desired to follow the path of religious practices. For the said purpose, she decided to sell the aforesaid land belonging to her and deriving from selling the agriculture land towards charity and religious endowments.
4. The respondent No.1 is the nephew of Miss.Kasturi. The respondent No.1 happens to be the late brother of Miss.Kasturi D/o Payappa Mudakannavar. Respondent No.1 with a malafide and sinister motivation hatched a conspiracy with certain other persons to gulp up the said land so as to deprive the valuable property rights of the petitioner. The respondent No.1 induced and instigated the vendor, Miss.Kasturi D/o Payappa Mudakannavar to file a false and frivolous suit against the petitioner for impeaching the Sale Deed in respect of the -5- NC: 2024:KHC-D:10805 WP No. 104516 of 2024 land bearing R.S.No.1225/1 of Belagavi sold to the petitioner and also Miss.Kasturi D/o Payappa Mudakannavar with that end in view, instituted a false, frivolous and a fraudulent suit in O.S.No.481/2023 for declaration and injunction at the behest of the respondent No.1. The copy of the plaint is also produced.
5. It is also the contention that the document of adoption deed dated 14.07.2023 is created subsequent to the selling of the property and hence made an application before the Trial Court stating that if any judgment and decree is passed based on the adoption deed changing the name, it affects the right of the petitioner.
6. The Trial Court having considered the application and also considering the objection statement filed by the respondent, has rejected the application erroneously and the same is required to be set aside.
7. The counsel would vehemently contend that if name has been changed as sought in the suit, it affects his -6- NC: 2024:KHC-D:10805 WP No. 104516 of 2024 right and this attempt is made only creating the document of adoption dated 14.07.2023 that too as an afterthought intended to throw out the petitioner's right, title and interest in respect of the property which he had purchased. If he is impleaded in the case, it will not cause any injustice to the other side and hence it requires quashing of the same.
8. Per contra the counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 brought to notice of this Court the contents of the plaint in O.S.No.481/2023 and also the relief is sought in this earlier suit in O.S.No.481/2023 and counsel also brought to notice of this Court the suit filed by the respondent in O.S.No.1335/2023, wherein relief is sought only for the change of name consequent upon the adoption deed dated 14.07.2023 and the same will not affect the rights of the respondent and Trial Court also having taken note of the prayer sought in O.S.No.481/2023, rightly comes to the conclusion that this petitioner is not necessary party to decide the relief sought -7- NC: 2024:KHC-D:10805 WP No. 104516 of 2024 in O.S.No.1335/2023, wherein only sought for the relief of change of his name based on the adoption deed and rightly passed the order in rejecting the same. Counsel also submits that the Trial Court, while passing an order, made an observation that he can agitate his rights in the said suit.
9. Having heard the petitioner's counsel and also the counsel appearing for the respondent No.1, this Court has to take note of the averments of the plaint in O.S.No.1335/2023 wherein an application is filed to implead him as party to the proceedings by filing an application under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of CPC. The prayer is only with regard to change of name consequent upon the execution of adoption deed and not sought for any other relief in respect of the Sale Deed executed in favor of the petitioner herein and the same is not the issue.
10. When such being the case, in a case for seeking only the relief of change of name, the Trial Court taken -8- NC: 2024:KHC-D:10805 WP No. 104516 of 2024 note of the said fact that there is no need of petitioner's presence to decide the case and already suit was filed in O.S.No.481/2023 and also an observation is made that he can agitate the same in the said suit.
11. The counsel appearing for the petitioner also brought to notice of this Court that respondents No.1 to 4 have been made as party and reply to the said submission, counsel for the respondent No.1 submits that the name of the respondent has entered in the Corporation and hence they are made as party to the proceedings and also the relief is sought in respect of change of name in the school entries and not in respect of right of immovable property, and hence the apprehension of the petitioner that by changing his name based on the adoption deed may seek for the relief in an appropriate forum, the said apprehension cannot be accepted when there was a Sale Deed in favor of the petitioner vide Sale Deed dated 09.02.2023 i.e. prior to the adoption deed and hence I do not find any ground to set aside the order of the Trial -9- NC: 2024:KHC-D:10805 WP No. 104516 of 2024 Court and the presence of the petitioner in a suit filed by the respondent No.1 that too for a change of name based on the adoption deed is not necessary and he is not a necessary party and hence I do not find any merit in the writ petition to quash the impugned order.
12. In view of the discussion made above, I pass the following order:
ORDER Writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SH CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42