Karnataka High Court
Smt.Sulochana W/O Siddanagouda ... vs Sri.Hanumantagouda S/O ... on 8 November, 2022
Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
-1-
WP No. 146872 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO. 146872 OF 2020 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT.SULOCHANA W/O SIDDANAGOUDA BUDIHAL,
AGE:80 YEARS, OCC: HOME MAKER,
R/O: HARGONDONI, TQ: BALLARI.
2. SMT. CHENNAMMA R. KENCHARADDI,
AGE:70 YEARS, OCC: HOME MAKER,
R/O: BHAGYA NAGAR, KOPPAL.
3. SMT. SUVARNA @ SHANTAWWA D. MALLIGWAD,
AGE:55 YEARS, OCC: HOME MAKER,
R/O: KARMADI, TQ:YALBURGA, DIST: KIOPPAL.
4. SMT. SANGAMMA W/O MARIYAPPA PALLED,
AGE:55 YEARS, OCC: HOME MAKER,
R/O: BHAGYA NAGAR, KOPPAL.
5. SMT. KAMALABAI W/O MALLANAGOUDA HANDRAL,
AGE:70 YEARS, OCC: HOME MAKER,
R/O: MAHANTESH NAGAR, BELAGAVI.
THE PETITIONER ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR
GPA HOLDER SRI. MAILARAPPA SAHEBAGOUDA
HANDRAL, AGE:84 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED,
R/O: NO.2371, SECTOR NO.11M,
MAHANTESHNAGAR, BELAGAVI.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI HANUMANTHAREDDY SAHUKAR, ADVOCATE)
-2-
WP No. 146872 of 2020
AND:
SRI.HANUMANTAGOUDA S/O BHOJAPPAGOUDA
PATIL, AGE:38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O: MISHRIKOTI, TQ: KALGHATAGI,
DIST: DHARWAD-581204.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI RAJASHEKHAR R ARANI, ADVOCATE)
***
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO;
A. A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY
OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE ORDR
DATED 10.02.2020 ON I.A.NO.4 TO 6 IN R.A.NO.92/2015
PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL DISTRIT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD, PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-L
AND DISMISS THE APPLICATION I.A.NO.4 TO 6 VIDE
ANNEXURE-B, C, AND D RESPECTIVELY, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
By the impugned order, the application to bring on
record the legal representatives of the deceased appellant
has been allowed.
WP No. 146872 of 2020
2. It is not in dispute that the original appellant
had filed a suit seeking for enforcement of the agreement
of sale said to have been executed by the mother of the
petitioners herein. It is not in dispute that the original
appellant died during the pendency of the appeal and on
the basis of a registered Will, the respondent herein made
an application to come on record to prosecute the appeal
as the legal heirs of the deceased appellant Dyamanna.
3. This Court in W.P.No.108396/2017(GM-CPC)
decided on 28.02.2019, between the very same parties,
had directed the Appellate Court to adjudicate upon the
validity of the Will dated 09.09.2009 in accordance with
law and thereafter permit the respondents therein to
cross-examine the legatee i.e., Hanamantagouda or any
other witnesses examined by him for that purpose. On the
basis of the said order, Hanamantagouda examined
himself and also the attesting witnesses. The Appellate
Court after considering the evidence adduced has come to
the conclusion that the Hanamantagouda had proved the
WP No. 146872 of 2020
execution of the Will and by virtue of being legatee under
the Will, he had the right to continue in the proceedings.
4. In my view, this order of the Appellate Court
being inconsonance with the judgment rendered by this
Court in W.P.No.108396/2017 decided on 28.02.2019,
cannot be found fault with.
5. I do not find any reason to entertain the writ
petition and the same is dismissed.
SD/-
JUDGE
AM
