Karnataka High Court
Sri.Basvaprabhu Patil vs Smt.Pushpavathi on 19 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:46837
WP No. 30722 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 30722 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SRI. BASVAPRABHU PATIL
S/O. DODDABASAVANA GOWDA,
AGED: 48 YEARS,
R/O KARADIGUDDA VILLAGE,
MANVI TQ., RAICHUR DIST.-584123.
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT. BHAVANA N. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. PUSHPAVATHI
W/O. HANUMESH,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/O. NO.20, 4TH CROSS,
AGB COLONY, JS NAGAR,
SARASWATHIPURA,
NANDINI LAYOUT,
Digitally signed BENGALURU NORTH-560 096
by
MARKONAHALLI PERMANENT RESIDENT:
RAMU PRIYA NO.20, RABBANKALLU POST,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF MANVI TALUQ, RAICHUR DISTRICT.
KARNATAKA
2. THE MANAGER,
MOLEX (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,
PLOT NO.6(A),
SADARAMANGALA INDUSTRIAL AREA,
KADUGODI, BENGALURU-560 067.
3. BELLFAST MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,
NO.4809, 8TH FLOOR, 56/1,
HIGHPOINT, IV, PALACE ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:46837
WP No. 30722 of 2024
MANAMOHAN K.N.
REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956
4. SMT. SUNITHA,
W/O. LATE MANJESH YADAV,
D/O. JAYARAMALU,
HOUSE NO.41,
KURUVAKAL, ATHKUR,
ATHKUR TALUQ AND DISTRICT,
RAICHUR-584 102.
5. THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER,
EPF OFFICE, NO.13,
BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAWAN,
RAJA RAM MOHAN ROY ROAD,
RICHMOND RD,
BENGALURU-560 025.
UAN NO 100700770908
...RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED
07.08.2024 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1/2024 IN O.S.NO.3381/2021 VIDE
ANNEXURE-E AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ
ORAL ORDER
The applicant in O.S.No.3381/2021 pending trial before
the XLI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru
(henceforth referred to as 'Trial Court') has filed this petition
challenging an order dated 07.08.2024 by which, his
application (I.A.No.1/2024) filed under Order I Rule 10(2) of
NC: 2024:KHC:46837
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (henceforth referred to as
'CPC') to come on record was rejected.
2. The parties shall henceforth be referred to as they
were arrayed before the Trial Court. The petitioner herein was
the applicant in I.A.No.1/2024 filed before the Trial Court. The
respondent No.1 was the plaintiff, while the respondent Nos.2
to 5 were the defendants before the Trial Court.
3. A suit in O.S.No.3381/2021 was filed by the plaintiff
for the following reliefs:-
i) Pass a judgment and decree against the
defendants 1, 2 and 4 restraining them
permanently from releasing the death benefits of
late Manjesh Yadav, who was working as Senior
H.R. in Defendant No.1 & 2 Company from 2015
till his death in favor of Defendant No.3.
ii) Pass a judgment and decree directing
Defendants 1, 2 and 4 to pay to the Plaintiff and
Defendant 3 by 50:50 ratio payable due to the
death of Manjesh Yadav. In the alternative,
direct the Defendants 1, 2 and 4 to deposit the
entire amount before this Hon'ble Court till the
disposal of the suit.
NC: 2024:KHC:46837
4. When the suit was set down for the evidence of the
plaintiff, an application (I.A.No.1/2024) was filed by the
applicant/petitioner herein to come on record. In the affidavit
accompanying the application, it was stated that the plaintiff,
her husband and their son/Sri. Manjesh Yadav had availed hand
loan of Rs.5,00,000/- for the purposes of marriage of Sri.
Manjesh Yadav. The plaintiff, her husband and their son
executed a promissory note on 09.09.2020 and agreed to repay
the amount within a period of two years along with interest at
the rate of 1.5% per annum. He contended that the marriage
of son of the plaintiff was performed on 19.10.2020 at Raichur.
However, he died due to COVID - 19 on 29.05.2021. After the
death of the son of the plaintiff, the applicant/petitioner herein
requested the plaintiff to return the money. Since the plaintiff
allegedly did not repay the money, he filed an application
(I.A.No.1/2024) to come on record in the present suit.
5. This application was contested by the defendant
No.3.
6. The Trial Court in terms of the impugned order
rejected the application on the ground that the
NC: 2024:KHC:46837
applicant/petitioner herein was neither a proper nor a
necessary party for the adjudication of the suit. It held that the
applicant/petitioner herein may pursue his remedy before the
proper forum to establish the claim against the plaintiff and the
defendant No.3.
7. Being aggrieved by the said order, the applicant is
before this Court in this writ petition.
8. The learned counsel for the applicant contended
that the plaintiff and defendant No.3, who are entitled to the
service benefits of the deceased, are liable in law to repay the
amount payable to the applicant and therefore, the applicant is
a proper and necessary party for the adjudication of the suit.
She contends that except the service benefits of the deceased-
Sri. Manjesh Yadav, there is no property against which the
applicant can proceed to recover the money and therefore, the
presence of the applicant in the case is necessary.
9. The suit filed in O.S.No.3381/2021 is on the
premise that the plaintiff is entitled to 50% of the service
benefits of her son and the remaining 50% to the defendant
No.3. If the applicant has advanced any loan to the plaintiff or
NC: 2024:KHC:46837
to her husband or to her son, he is bound to establish the same
before the competent Court in the manner known to law. He
cannot seek for impleadment in the suit as he is neither a
necessary party nor a proper party. The suit can be decided in
the absence of the applicant/petitioner herein and he would not
be prejudiced in any manner by the disposal of the suit.
However, if the applicant/petitioner herein is able to establish
that the plaintiff, her husband and her son were liable to pay a
sum of Rs.5,00,000/-, he is at liberty to take such steps as are
available to him under law.
10. Hence, this petition lacks merit and is dismissed,
however, subject to the above observations.
Sd/-
(R. NATARAJ)
JUDGE
PMR
