Karnataka High Court
Sri. Chetan Marlecha vs Sri. Narayan Rao R Maanay on 28 February, 2024
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 1645 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. CHETAN MARLECHA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
S/O SRI SAMPATH RAJ
R/O NO.12, UTTARADIMUTT ROAD,
SHANKARPURAM
BENGALURU-560 004.
2. SRI VIKAS CHOPRA
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
S/O SRI BHAWARLAL
R/O NO.32437, KARTHIK MANSION,
3RD FLOOR, NAGARATH MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 002.
3. SRI RAVINDRA CHOPRA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
S/O SRI DUNGARMAL CHOPRA
R/O NO.16, SANKESHWAR CRYSTAL
3RD FLOOR, KRISHNA SINGH ALNE
SEETHA RAM MANDIR ROAD
Digitally signed by
VANDANA S HALASURUPET
Location: High BENGALURU-560 002.
Court of Karnataka
4. SRI CHETHAN G CHOPRA
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
S/O SRI GOUTHAM CHAND CHOPRA
R/O NO.905, 3RD FLOOR, MEGHA PLAZA,
NAGARTHPET MAIN ROAD
BENGALURU-560 002.
5. SRI VICKY JAIN
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
S/O SRI KANHAIYALAL JAIN
R/O NO.529/1, RAM IYENGAR ROAD
FLAT NO.202, COMFORT KRISHNA
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
OPP TO NMH V V PURAM
BENGALURU-560 004.
6. MISS NEELAM JAIN
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
W/O SRI LALITH JAIN
D/O SRI PARASMAL JAIN
R/O NO.68, FLAT NO.201
SHANKAR MUTT MAIN ROAD
SHANKARPURAM
BENGALURU-560 004.
7. SRI ANKIT KUMAR CHOPRA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
S/O SRI ASHOK KUMAR CHOPRA
R/O NO.67 3RD FLOOR,
SANKALP SIDDANNALANE
NAGARTHPET CROSS
BENGALURU-560 002.
8. SRI BHAVESH CHOPRA
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
S/O LALITH KUMAR
R/O NO.67 3RD FLOOR,
SANKALP SIDDANNALANE
NAGARTHPET CROSS
BENGALURU-560 002.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. DEEPAK D C.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. NARAYAN RAO R MAANAY
S/O LATE N RAGHUNATH RAO MAANAY
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
R/AT NO.424/1, 22ND CROSS,
10TH MAIN, BANASHANKARI II STAGE
BANGALORE-560 070.
2. M/S RNA ENTERPRISES
REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM
MUNICIPAL NO.248, 249 AND 250
OLD THARAGUPET
BANGALORE-560053
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER
SRI NARAYAN RAO R MAANAY.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
3. SMT PADMA BAI
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
NAME OF THE HUSBAND NOT
KNOWN TO THE PLANTIFF.
4. SMT LATHA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
W/O SRI MUKUND RAO
R/AT NO.99, 2ND MAIN,
6TH CROSS, BIKASIPURA EXTENSION,
ISRO LAYOUT
BANGALORE-560 061.
5. SMT INUTHA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
W/O SRI SATHYANARAYANA RAO
R/AT NO.19, 2ND MAIN, 6TH CROSS
BIKASIPURA EXTENSION,
ISRO LAYOUT
BANGALORE-560 061.
6. SMT BHAGIRATHI BAI
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
W/O SRI SHEKAR B
R/AT NO.40/1, 5TH CROSS,
WILSON GARDEN
BANGALORE-560 027.
7. SMT MALINI
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
W/O SRI VISHWANATH RAO SOLANKY
R/AT NO.32/40, 3RD MAIN ROAD,
5TH CROSS, WILSON GARDEN
BANGALORE-560 027.
8. SRI ASHOK R MAANAY
S/O LATE N RAGHUNATH RAO MAANAY
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
R/AT NO.1759/A, 34TH CROSS,
BANASHANKARI 2ND STAGE
BANGALORE-560 070.
9. SMT SUSHILA DEVI R MAANAY
W/O LATE N RAGHUNATH RAO MAANAY
AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS
R/AT NO.1759/A 34TH CROSS,
BANASHANKAR 2ND STAGE
BANGALORE-560 070.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
10. SMT ROHINI ANAND
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
W/O DR ANAND
R/AT SRINIKESH NO.2249,
OFF K R ROAD
BANASHANKARI 2ND STAGE
BANGALORE-560 070.
11. SMT MEENA D PAWAR
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
W/O SRI DAYARAM RAO M PAWAR
R/AT NO.1-2-26, GAGANMAHAL ROAD
OPP SCOUT AND GUIDES
DOMAL GUDA
HYDERABAD-560 029.
12. SMT ANITHA RAVINDRANATH
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
W/O DR S RAVINDRANATH
R/AT NO.1244, 32ND G CROSS,
28TH MAIN, JAYANAGAR , 4TH BLOCK,
BANGALORE-560 041.
13. M/S M S GARMENTS
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR
NO.9 AND 10 SLN COMPLEX
(LAL BUILDINGS)
OLD THARAGUPET
BANGALORE-560 053.
14. SHRI NARAYAN H TALREJA
S/O SRI HASANND
SHOP NO.G-1 SLN COMPLEX
NO.248 AND 249,
OLD THARAGPET
BANGALORE-560 053.
15. SMT BEENA AGARWAL
W/O SHRI VIJAYKUMAR AGARWAL
SHOP NO.G-2SLN COMPLEX
NO.248, 249 AND 259 OLD THARAGPET
BANGALORE-560 053.
16. SMT SAROJAMMA
W/O SRI G N RAJSHEKAR
SHOP NO.G-3 SLN COMPLEX
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
NO.248, 249 AND 259 OLD THARAGPET
BANGALORE-560 053.
17. STM SHANTI DEVI LUNIA
W/O SRI DEOCHAND LUNIA
SHOP NO.G-4 AND 5, SLN COMPLEX
248, 249 AND 250
OLD THARAGPET
BANGALORE-560 053.
18. SHRI KAPANI GOWDA
S/O NANJE GOWDA
SHOP NO.G-6, SLN COMPLEX
248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET
BANGALORE-560 053.
19. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR GOUTHI
S/O MANGILA GOUTHI
SHOP NO.G-7, SLN COMPLEX
248, 249 AND 250
OLD THARAGPET
BANGALORE-560 053.
20. SMT JEETAN DEVI KUNDALIA
W/O SRI TOLRAM KUNDALIA
SHOP NO.G-8, SLN COMPLEX
248, 249 AND 250
OLD THARAGPET
BANGALORE-560 053.
21. SRI SUNDAR KUMAR GOUTHI
S/O SRI MANGILAL CHORARIA
SHOP NO.G-9, SLN COMPLEX
248, 249 AND 250
OLD THARAGPET
BANGALORE-560 053.
22. SRI RAICHAND SETHIA
S/O DHANCHAND SETHIA
SHOP NO.G-10, SLN COMPLEX
248, 249 AND 250
OLD THARAGPET
BANGALORE-560 053.
23. SMT SYED RABIYABI
S/O SYED BASHA
SHOP NO G11, SLN COMPLEX
NO 248,249 AND 250
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
OLD THARAGAPET
BANGALORE 560 053.
24. SMT DHANA LAXMI
W/O SHRI JAGADEESH
SHOP NO G12
SLN COMPEX
NO 248,249 AND 250
OLD THARAGAPET
BANGALORE 560 053.
25. SMT MADHU GUPTA
W/O MADAN MOHAN GUPTA
SHOP NO G12
SLN COMPEX
NO 248,249 AND 250
OLD THARAGAPET
BANGALORE 560 053.
26. SHRI PUSPENDAR KUMAR
S/O SRI MUNEEK CHAND JAIN
SHOP NO G14
SLN COMPEX
NO 248,249 AND 250
OLD THARAGAPET
BANGALORE 560 053.
27. SMT SARITHA JAIN DAGA
W/O SRI OMPRAKASH DAGA
SHOP NO G15
SLN COMPEX
NO 248,249 AND 250
OLD THARAGAPET
BANGALORE 560 053.
28. SMT PREMAS LATHA
W/O SHRI SHANTILAL
SHOP NO G16, SLN COMPEX
NO 248,249 AND 250
OLD THARAGAPET
BANGALORE 560 053.
29. SRI LALITH KUMAR
S/O GEWAR CHAND JAIN,
SHOP NO. G-17, SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
30. SMT PREMA LATHA U JAIN
W/O SHRI U C HHABRAJ JAIN,
SHOP NO. G-18, SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
31. SHRI RAMESH T JAIN
S/O THARA CHAND JAIN,
SHOP NO. G-19, SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
32. SMT R INDRA JAIN
W/O SHRI RAMESH JAIN
SHOP NO. G-20, SADGURU GARMENTS
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
33. SHRI BHAWARLAL JAIN
S/O SRI SOHANLALJI JAIN
SHOP NO. F-2, SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
34. SHRI KANAKRAJ MEHTA
SHRI SAJJAN RAJ MEHTA
SMT PADMA RAJ MEHTA
S/O SRI UGAM RAJ MEHTA
SHOP NO. F-3 ADN F-4,
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
35. SMT SUNITHA NAHAR
W/O SRI NIRMAL KUMAR NAHAR
SHOP NO. F-5, SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
36. SHRI RAJENDRA KUMAR NAHAR
S/O SRI MOHANLALJI
SHOP NO. F-6 , SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
-8-
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
37. SHRI PRAKASH MAL JAIN
S/O SRI SUKHRAJI
SHOP NO. F-7
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
38. SMT LEELA DEVI
W/O SRI DUNGARMAL
SHOP NO. F-8
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
39. SHRI ANIL KUMAR BAID
S/O SRI SURAJMAL BAID
SHRI PAWAN KUMAR BAID,
S/O SRIHATHIMAL BAID
SHOP NO. F-9 AND F-10,
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
40. SMT NILAM DEVI SEITHYA
W/O SRI RAICHANDSEITHYA
SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR
SHOP NO. F-11, SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
41. SMT PANI DEVI
W/O SRI KIM CHANDJI
SHOP NO. F-12 CHOPRA EXPORTS,
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
42. SIR MAHENDRA KUMAR SIMALI
S/O LADU RAMJI SIMALI BHOVESH,
SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR,
SHOP NO. S-1
-9-
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
43. SRI GOUTHAM CHAND PORWAL
RAKESH, SHOP NO.S-2
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
44. SRI RAJENDRA
P K GARMENTS, SHOP NO. S-3
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
45. SRI RAM SUNDAR BAGARIA
SRI SHAM SUNDAR BAGARIA,
S/O SRI SITARAMBAGARIA,
SHOP NO. S-4 AND S05
SHANTI GARMENTS
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
46. SMT NEELA DEVI SEITHYA
W/O RAICHANDSEITHYA
SHOP NO.S-6 , KAVITHA TRADERS,
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
47. SRI PREM KUMAR MALOO
SHOP NO. S-7, B L TRADING
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
48. SMT BASANTHI DEVI
W/O BHAWARLAL,
SHOP NO. S-8, MUTHA EXPORTS, ,
SLN COMPLEX, NO 248, 249 AND 250,
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
49. SRI PADMA RAJ MEHTHA
S/O UGAM RAJ MEHTA
SHOP NO. S-9,
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
50. SMT SAVITA DEVI
W/O LALIT KUMAR,
SHOP NO. S-10,
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 53.
51. SMT MANJU DEVI BUCHA
W/O UMEDMAL BUCHA,
SHOP NO. S-11,
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
52. SRI MADAN CHAND CHOIRA
S/O BHAWARLAL CHOIRA
SHOP NO. S-12,
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
53. SRI UMED MAL BUCHA
S/O POKARMALJI BUCHA,
SHOP NO. T, SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
54. SRI TEJ RAJ
S/O SAREMALJI
SHOP NO.T-1
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
55. SRI RAICHANDSEITHYA
S/O DANCHAND SEITHYA
SHOP NO. T-2, SLN COMPLEX,
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
56. SRI GIRIDHAR LAL
S/O KESHRIMALJI
SHOP NO.T-3
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
57. SMT REKHA VARDHAN
W/O ASHOK KUMAR VARDHAN,
SHOP NO. T-4, SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
58. SRI KRISHNA KUMAR AGARWAL
S/O CHATURBHUJI,
SHOP NO. T-5 AND T-6,
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
59. SRI OM PRAKASH DAGA
S/O LUNKARAN DAGA,
SHOP NO T-7, SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
0LD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
60. SRI VINAY JAIN
S/O HANSRAJ JAIN,
SHOP NO T-8 AND T-9, SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
61. SRI TEJ RAJ JAIN
S/O SARMAL JAIN,
SHOP NO T-10, SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
62. SRI NEELAM KUMAR NAHAR
S/O BALCHAND NAHAR,
SHOP NO T-11, SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
63. SRI BHAWAR LAL
S/O KHEMCHAND
SHOP NO T-12,
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
64. SRI SHANTI LAL
S/O CHAGAN RAJ,
SHOP NO T-6A,
SLN COMPLEX,
NO 248, 249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE 560 053.
65. SMT. SANGEETHA DEVI,
W/O GOWTHAM CHAND,
SHOP NO. FO-1,
SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
66. SRI SHANTI LAL,
S/O GISHHLAL JAIN,
SHOP NO. FO-2,
SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
67. SRI KAN RAJ,
S/O CHAGANJAIN,
SHOP NO. FO-3, SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
68. SMT. ROHINI DEVI
W/O PRAKASH MAL JAIN,
SHOP NO. FO-4,
SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
69. SRI EISHWAR SINGH,
S/O SAVAI SINGH,
SHOP NO. FO-5, SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
70. SRI KHANTI LAL,
S/O BAWARLAL MUNUT,
SHOP NO. FO-6, SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
71. SRI ASHOK KUMAR
S/O SARAMAL JAIN,
SHOP NO. FO-7, SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
72. SRI PREM KUMAR MALOO,
S/O BAWARLAL MALOO,
SHOP NO. FO-8, SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
73. SRI GOWTHAM CHAND
S/O KHEM CHAND,
SHOP NO. FO-9, SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
74. SRI ASHOK KUMAR G
S/O GHEAAR CHAND,
SHOP NO. FO-10, SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
75. SMT. MANJU DEVI,
W/O ASHOK KUMAR,
SHOP NO. FO-11, SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
76. SRI SANGEETHA DEVI,
W/O GOUTHAM CHAND,
SHOP NO. FO-12,
SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
77. SRI MANISH KUMAR,
SHOP NO. FI-2,
SLN COMPLEX, 248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET, BANGALORE - 560 053.
78. SRI TEJ RAJ,
SHOP NO. FI-3,
SLN COMPLEX, 248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET, BANGALORE - 560 053.
79. SRI DHARAM CHAND
SHOP NO. FI-4,
SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250,
OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
80. H M GARMENTS
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR,
NO.9 AND 10, SLN COMPLEX
248,249 AND 250, OLD THARAGPET,
BANGALORE - 560 053.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SHRISTI WIDGE.,ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. MANU PRABHAKAR KULKARNI., ADVOCATE FOR C/R-1 & R-2)
THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION
OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASH THE ORDER PASSED ON IA NO.
13/2022 DATED 29/11/2023 BY THE CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BENGALURU CCH NO. 26, IN OS NO. 4792/2014, PRODUCED AT
ANNEXURE-A BY ALLOWING THE PRESENT PETITION AND ETC.
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
WP No. 1645 of 2024
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition by the defendants 79 to 86 in O.S.No.4792/2014
on the file of X Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge, is directed
against the impugned order dated 29.11.2023 passed on
I.A.Nos.13 and 18, whereby the said applications filed by the 1st
respondent - plaintiff for permission to withdraw a sum of
Rs.32,06,572/- deposited by the tenants was allowed by the trial
court, which rejected I.A.18 filed by the petitioners - defendants 79
to 86 seeking a direction to release a sum of Rs.32,59,404/- in their
favour.
2. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the
respondents 1 and 2 - plaintiffs instituted the aforesaid suit against
the petitioners - defendants 79 to 86 and other defendants for
partition and separate possession of their alleged share in the suit
schedule property and for other reliefs. It is a matter of record that
the petitioners got themselves impleaded on 24.04.2019 as
defendants 79 to 86 to the suit. It is also an undisputed fact that the
- 16 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
petitioners are lis pendens / pendente lite purchasers of the suit
schedule property from defendants 1 to 5.
3. During the pendency of the suit, prior to the petitioners
getting themselves impleaded, there was an earlier round of
litigation between the parties in C.R.P.No.107/2015 & connected
matters dated 24.06.2016, whereby this Court permitted the parties
to seek release of the amounts deposited by way of rent for the
purpose of payment of municipal taxes and to attend the repairs of
the building, if any and its maintenance from time to time and the
same shall be released by the Court on proper presentation of
documents by the parties in that behalf.
4. Subsequent to the petitioners getting themselves
impleaded and filing their written statement on 06.01.2020,
respondents 1 and 2 - plaintiffs filed I.A.6 along with documents in
order to contend that a sum of Rs.31,83,739/- deposited by the
tenants is to be released in their favour to meet the maintenance
and repair expenses of the suit schedule property. On 23.10.2019,
the trial court allowed I.A.6 filed by the respondents - plaintiffs and
permitted them to withdraw the amount by holding as under:-
- 17 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
" ORDER ON I.A.No.6.
Heard the plaintiffs counsel and the order of the
Hon'ble High court of Karnataka as well as quotation
and details of expenses.
The plaintiffs' counsel has filed I.A.No.6 under
Section 151 of CPC for release of Rs.31,83,739/- to
meet the maintenance and repair expenses of the
suit schedule property, for which none of the
defendants have submitted objection.
This is the suit filed by the plaintiffs against the
defendant No.1 to 5 for partition and separate
possession. Defendant No.6 to 86 are the tenants in
the suit schedule property. As per the directions,
they have deposited the rents in the Court.
According to the plaintiffs' counsel, lift has to
be replaced at the cost of Rs.6,50,000/- and also he
needs Rs.25,33,759/- to meet the expenses of tax
and building repairs. Thus in all plaintiff needs
Rs.31,83,739/- to meet the expenses of suit schedule
property establishment.
According to the observation of the Hon'ble
High Court in its order dated 24.06.2016, this Court is
required to release the amount to meet such
expenses but subject to verification of documents.
I have verified the quotation and other
attached chart of expenses. Inspite of service of
copy, none of the defendant No.1 to 5 have raised
any objection. As such, I see no reasons to reject the
- 18 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
claim of the plaintiffs. Hence, I proceed to pass the
following:-
ORDER
I.A.No.6 filed under Section 151 of CPC by the
plaintiffs is allowed.
Office is directed to release a sum of
Rs.31,83,739/- to the plaintiffs subject to following:-
-conditions-
(I) Plaintiffs shall use the amount only for the
payment of salary of office staff and to meet the over
all repair expenses of the building and property taxes,
if any;
(ii) Plaintiffs shall submit details of expenses
and receipts to the Court without giving any room to
doubtful circumstances.
For plaintiff's evidence by 06.01.2020."
5. A perusal of the aforesaid order dated 23.10.2019 will
indicate that the trial court has directed release of the amount only
for the purpose of payment of salary to the office staff and to meet
the over all repair expenses of the building and property tax and
further directed the plaintiffs to submit the details of expenses and
receipts to the trial court without giving any room to doubtful
circumstances. It is also matter on record that the said directions
issued by the trial court to furnish the details has been complied
with by respondents 1 and 2. The said order dated 23.10.2019 has
- 19 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
attained finality and become conclusive and binding upon the
petitioners.
6. Subsequently, while the respondents 1 and 2 - plaintiffs
filed one more application I.A.13 seeking permission to withdraw
the subsequent accumulated rent of Rs.32,06,572/-, the petitioners
who are impleaded themselves as defendants 79 to 86 also filed
similar application seeking release of the said amount in their
favour. By the impugned orders, the trial court allowed I.A.13 and
rejected I.A.18, aggrieved by which, the petitioners are before this
Court by way of the present petition.
7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
respondents-plaintiffs had not produced sufficient material to show
that they were spending money towards maintenance etc., of the
suit schedule property and no reliance can be placed upon the said
documents in support of their claim. It is also pointed out that the
objections of the petitioners have not been considered by the trial
court and this is also one circumstance to vitiate the impugned
order. It is also submitted that after having purchased the suit
- 20 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
schedule property during the pendency of the suit, since the BBMP
has demanded tax from the petitioners, they have paid property tax
to the BBMP and as such, it is necessary that the petitioners are
permitted to withdraw the said amount deposited by the tenants
before the trial court.
9. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 -
plaintiffs invited my attention to the earlier order passed by the trial
court allowing I.A.No.6 on 23.10.2019 in order to contend that the
said order has attained finality and become conclusive and binding
upon the petitioners, who had undisputedly become parties to the
suit at that point in time. It is submitted that while allowing the said
application, the trial court directed the respondents - plaintiffs to
produce the documents, the details as regards the expenditure
which have been furnished by the respondents, who also furnished
additional documents to show their recurring expenditure along
with I.A.13 and the trial court was fully justified in allowing I.A.13
and rejecting I.A.18 by passing the impugned order, which does not
warrant interference by this Court in the present petition.
10. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival
submissions and perused the material on record.
- 21 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
11. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the
petitioners got themselves impleaded on 24.04.2019 as defendants
79 to 86 to the suit and have filed the written statement. In this
context, it is needless to state that being pendente lite purchasers,
the petitioners would be bound by any orders, judgment, decree
etc., to be passed in the present suit. Further, it is a matter of
record that the petitioners are not incurring any expenditure
towards maintenance of the suit schedule property including
repairs, payment of salary etc., which are being borne by the
respondents 1 and 2. In fact, pursuant to the order passed in
C.R.P.No.107/2015 & connected matters dated 24.06.2016, the
respondents 1 and 2 - plaintiffs filed I.A.6 seeking release of
Rs.31,83,739/- deposited by the tenants and the same was allowed
by the trial court after noticing that none of the defendants including
the petitioners - defendants 79 to 86 had opposed or objected to
I.A.6. As stated supra, the said order passed by the trial court on
I.A.6 has attained finality and become conclusive and binding upon
all the parties including the petitioners.
12. It is also pertinent to note that when this Court permitted
the parties to file application seeking release of the amounts
- 22 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
deposited by the tenants in C.R.P.No.107/2015 & connected
matters dated 24.06.2016, the petitioners had not got impleaded
and are consequently not entitled to place reliance upon the said
order of this Court in support of their claim in I.A.18 for release of
the amounts.
13. The petitioners contend in I.A.18 that they have paid
Rs.18 lakhs towards property taxes as demanded by the BBMP
and as such, the amounts deposited by the tenants are to be
released in favour of the petitioners. The said contention is wholly
misconceived and untenable inasmuch as the petitioners being
undisputedly pendente lite purchasers of the suit schedule property
from defendants 1 to 5 cannot claim absolute right, title, interest or
possession over the suit schedule property, since the same would
be subject to the final outcome of the suit which would be binding
upon the petitioners. It is needless to state that there was no
liability cast upon the petitioners / pendente lite purchasers to pay
property tax as demanded by the BBMP and so long as the suit
was pending adjudication, it is not open for the petitioners to
contend that the property tax paid by them to the BBMP during the
pendency of the litigation / suit had to be refunded by directing
- 23 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
release of the amount in their favour. At any rate, it is not the
contention of the petitioners that they incurred any expenditure
towards maintenance, repairs, salaries etc., and as such, I am of
the considered opinion that the trial court was fully justified in
rejecting I.A.18 filed by the petitioners seeking release of the
amount and the impugned order cannot be said to suffer from any
illegality or infirmity warranting interference in the present petition.
14. Insofar as the impugned order passed by the trial court
allowing I.A.13 filed by the respondents 1 and 2 - plaintiffs seeking
release of the amounts is concerned, as stated supra, under
identical circumstances, a similar application I.A.6 filed by the
plaintiffs seeking the same relief was allowed by the trial court on
23.10.2019 which has become conclusive and binding upon the
petitioners, since the same has attained finality, especially when
the petitioners had not filed any objections nor contested I.A.6.
Under these circumstances, even assuming that the trial court
committed an error in the impugned order in stating that the
petitioners had not filed objections to I.A.13, by applying the
doctrine of parity and the principles of res judicata, coupled with the
fact that the petitioners are merely pendente lite purchasers
- 24 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
simpliciter who are undisputedly not incurring any expenditure
towards maintenance, repairs, salaries etc., in relation to the suit
schedule property, I am of the view that the trial court was fully
justified in allowing the application I.A.13 filed by the respondents 1
and 2 - plaintiffs.
15. The contention of the petitioners that the documents
produced by the respondents 1 and 2 are concocted and do not
relate to the suit schedule property cannot be accepted for more
than one reason; firstly, the petitioners being merely pendente lite
purchasers simpliciter who are undisputedly not incurring any
expenditure towards maintenance, repairs, salaries etc., in relation
to the suit schedule property cannot claim that they have any
personal knowledge about the said documents nor do they have
any locus standi to dispute the said documents; secondly, identical
/ similar documents have already been produced by the
respondents 1 and 2 while allowing I.A.6 and subsequently also
and there is no warrant to disbelieve the said documents; lastly, a
prima facie examination of the said documents in the absence of
any contrary material is sufficient to come to the conclusion that the
respondents 1 and 2 would be entitled to place reliance upon the
- 25 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
said documents in support of I.A.13 especially when the
respondents had produced additional documents with details
regarding expenditure. At any rate, so long as the petitioners are
pendente lite purchasers simpliciter who are undisputedly not
incurring any expenditure towards maintenance, repairs, salaries
etc., in relation to the suit schedule property, it cannot be said that
any prejudice would be caused to the petitioners by allowing I.A.13,
particularly when the entire accounts in this regard would be
furnished by the respondents 1 and 2 and the release of the
amounts in their favour would be subject to final outcome of the
suit.
16. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I do not
find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the
trial court that has occasioned failure of justice warranting
interference by this Court in the present petition as held by the
Apex Court in the case of Radhey Shyam Vs. Chhabi Nath -
(2015) 5 SCC 423.
17. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the petition and the
same is hereby dismissed.
- 26 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8397
In view of the disposal of the petition, interim applications, if
any, does not survive for consideration and the same stands
dismissed.
SD/-
JUDGE
Srl.
