Smt.Shivakka vs Karabasappa
2023 Latest Caselaw 5314 Kant

                                                     -1-
                                                                        NC: 2023:KHC-D:8290
                                                                  WP No. 105267 of 2016




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
                             DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
                                                 BEFORE
                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR
                           WRIT PETITION NO. 105267 OF 2016 (GM-CPC)

                   BETWEEN:
                   SMT.SHIVAKKA W/O. RUDRAGOUDA PIDANAGOUDA,
                   AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
                   R/O: YALAVATTI VILLAGE, SHIRAHATTI,
                   TQ: SHIRAHATTI, DIST: GADAG.
                                                                                ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI. PRUTHVI K.S., ADVOCATE)
                   AND:
                   1.   KARABASAPPA S/O. BASAPPA HOOLIKATTI,
                        AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                        R/O: NARAYANPUR, TQ: SHIGGAON,
                        DIST: HAVERI.

                   2.   YALLAPPA S/O. MAHADEVAPPA SAALAMANI,
                        @ HARAKUNI, AGE: 68 YEARS,
                        OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                        R/O: SHEELAVANT SOMAPUR,
                        NOW AT SUB-JAIL, DHARWAD,
Digitally signed        DIST: DHARWAD.
by JAGADISH T
R                                                                           ...RESPONDENTS
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
                   (R1 AND R2 SERVED)
KARNATAKA
Date:
2023.08.08
11:19:53
                          THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARCTICLES 226 AND
+0530
                   227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO: QUASH THE
                   IMPUGNED ORDER ON IA.NO.1 DATED:24.06.2016, PASSED BY THE
                   COURT    OF   CIVIL   JUDGE   AND       JMFC    COURT,      SHIGGAON   IN
                   OS.NO.181/2014 VIDE ANNEXURE-E.


                          THIS   WRIT    PETITION,   COMING        ON    FOR    PRELIMINARY
                   HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY,                THE COURT MADE THE
                   FOLLOWING:
                                    -2-
                                                 NC: 2023:KHC-D:8290
                                          WP No. 105267 of 2016




                              ORDER

This petition by the impleading applicant in OS

No.181/2014 is directed against the impugned order dated

24.06.2016 passed by learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Shiggaon,

whereby IA No.1 filed by the petitioner/impleading applicant

seeking impleadment as additional defendant No.2 to the suit

was rejected by the trial Court.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

perused the material on record.

3. The material on record discloses that respondent

No.1/plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit against respondent

No.2/defendant for specific performance and other reliefs in

relation to the suit schedule immovable properties. The said

suit is being contested by the defendant. During the pendency

of the suit, the petitioner claiming to be daughter of defendant

and having instituted one more suit in OS No.7/2012 against

the defendant and her siblings, filed instant application IA No.1

seeking impleadment as additional defendant to the suit. The

said application having been opposed by the plaintiff, the trial

Court proceeded to pass the impugned order rejecting the said

NC: 2023:KHC-D:8290 WP No. 105267 of 2016

IA No.1 by placing reliance on a decision of the Hon'ble Apex

Court in Kasturi Vs. Iyyamperumal & Others1 in order to

come to the conclusion that since the petitioner/impleading

applicant was neither party to the agreement to sell nor

executant thereof, the petitioner would not be proper and

necessary party to the suit for specific performance filed by the

plaintiff against the defendant. Aggrieved by the impugned

order passed by the trial Court, the petitioner is before this

Court by way of present writ petition.

4. Though several contentions have been urged by the

petitioner in relation to her alleged right, title, interest and

possession over the suit schedule property, since she was

neither a party to the alleged agreement to sell nor an

executant thereof, the trial Court was justified in relying upon

judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Kasturi's case supra

and hold that the petitioner cannot be construed/treated as

proper and necessary party to the suit. Accordingly, I do not

find any merit in the petition and same is hereby disposed of

without interfering with the impugned order. However, it is

made clear that any judgment or order or decree etc. passed or

2005 (3) KCCR 1545

NC: 2023:KHC-D:8290 WP No. 105267 of 2016

to be passed in OS No.181/2014 would not be binding upon the

petitioner nor would the same affect or prejudice her alleged

right, title or interest or possession, if any, over the suit

schedule properties. All rival contentions between the parties

in OS No.181/2014 as well as OS No.7/2012 filed by the

petitioner are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the

same.

5. Subject to the aforesaid observations, writ petition

stands disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

JTR