K. Thimma Reddy S/O Late Govinda ... vs Smt. Basamma W/O Late K Govinda ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 12012 Kant

                             -1-




                                    MSA No. 100087 of 2022




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 21st DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

                          BEFORE
          THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
 MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 100087 OF 2022
                            (RO)

BETWEEN:


1.   K. THIMMA REDDY S/O LATE GOVINDA REDDY
     AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
     R/O. KORLAGUNDI VILLAGE,
     TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI 583101.

2.   SMT. PUSHPAVATHI D/O LATE K. GOVINDA REDDY
     AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE,
     R/O. KORLAGUNDI VILLAGE,
     TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI 583101.



                                                 ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. K L.PATIL & SRI. S.S.BETURMATH, ADVOCATES)

AND:


     K GOVINDA REDDY SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.,

1.   SMT. BASAMMA W/O LATE K. GOVINDA REDDY
     AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
     R/O. KORLAGUNDI VILLAGE,
     TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI 583101.

2.   SMT. SEETHAMMA D/O LATE GOVINDA REDDY
     W/O G JAGANATHA REDDY
     AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE,
     R/O. DAMMURU VILLAGE,
     TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI 583101.
                             -2-




                                     MSA No. 100087 of 2022

3.   P HONNUR SAB S/O P. KASIM SAB
     AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST,
     R/O. K VEERAPURA VILLAGE,
     TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI-583101.

4.   SMT. SHARIFA BEE W/O SHARMAS VALI
     AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE,
     R/O. K. VEERAPURA VILLAGE,
     TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI 583101.



                                                ...RESPONDENTS


      THIS MSA IS FILED U/SEC.43 RULE 1 (u) OF CPC., PRAYING
TO, ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
30.07.2020 IN RA NO. 43/2017 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BALLARI THEREBY SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
AND DECREE PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, BALLARI IN OS NO. 895/2010 DATED
16.08.2017 AND REMANDED THE SUIT OF THE PLAINTIFF FOR
FRESH TRAIL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY WITHIN
THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION.
     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH PHYSICAL
HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:


                       JUDGMENT

1. Heard the appellant counsel and perused the

impugned order, wherein the first appellate Court

remanded the matter to implead necessary parties as well

as the properties in the proceedings and decide the case

and the same is questioned before this Court.

MSA No. 100087 of 2022

2. When the first appellate Court comes to the

conclusion that, necessary parties are not arrayed as

parties and the other parties have not been included in the

suit and taking note of the said fact remanded the matter

by setting aside the order passed by the trial Court.

3. When such being the case, I do not find any

ground to interfere with the finding of the first appellate

Court in remanding the matter and to entertain the

Miscellaneous Second Appeal and hence, I do not find any

merit in the appeal and accordingly, the appeal is

dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SVH