[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri Cheluvegowda vs Sri. Venkatesha on 2 December, 2025
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:50364
WP No. 11867 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 11867 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SRI CHELUVEGOWDA
S/O SINGRIGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
R/AT MELAPUR AVILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI
SRIRANGAPATTNA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 438.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI ROOPESHA B, ADV.)
AND:
1. SRI VENKATESHA
S/O LATE MARIGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS.
2. SMT. SHANTHA
D/O LATE MARIGOWDA
Digitally signed AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.
by NANDINI M
S 3. SMT. HONAMMA
Location: HIGH W/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS.
4. SMT. ANUSUYA
D/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS.
5. SRI KANTHI
S/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS.
6. SRI JAVARA
S/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:50364
WP No. 11867 of 2023
HC-KAR
7. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA
W/O LATE JAVAREGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS.
8. SMT. MANGALAMMA
W/O KRISHNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS.
RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 8
R/AT HOSA BEEDI
HINKAL VILLAGE
MYSURU POST & DISTRICT - 570 017.
9. SRI SRINIVASA
S/O LATE JAVAREGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
R/AT MANCHEGOWDANAKOPPLU
VILLAGE, MYSURU-570 017.
10. SMT. JAYAMMA
W/O LATE BETTEGOWDA
AGEDA BOUT 74 YEARS.
11. SRI CHELUVARAJU
S/O LATE BETTEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.
12. SRI NINGEGOWDA
S/O NINGEGOWDA &
BORAMMA
AGEDA BOUT 49 YEARS.
RESPONDENT NO.10 TO 12
ARE RESIDING AT MELAPURA VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI
SRIRANGAPATANA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 438.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI NITHIN RAMESH, ADV., FOR
SRI RAGHAVENDRA N, ADV, FOR R-1 TO R-9)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN
R.A.NO.5067/2017 FROM THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. DIST AND
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:50364
WP No. 11867 of 2023
HC-KAR
SESSIONS JUDGE MANDYA (SITTING AT SRIRANGAPATANA)DIRECT
OR A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDERS FOR EVEN DTD 24/02/2023 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.5067/2017 BY THE HONBLE III ADDL. DIST AND SESSIONS
JUDGE MANDYA (SITTING AT SRIRANGAPATANA) IN ALLOWING
IA.NO.II FILED UNDER ORDER VI RULE 17 R/W SEC 151 OF C.P.C.,
VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND ON I.A.NO. III FILED UNDER ORDER XIV
RULE 5 R.W SEC 151 OF C.P.C, VIDE ANNEXURE-K FILED BY THE R-1
TO 9 HEREIN.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
1. Defendant no.4 is before this Court under Article
227 of Constitution of India with a prayer to set aside the order
dated 24.02.2023 passed on I.A.No.II and I.A.No.III in
R.A.No.5067 of 2017 by the Court of III Addl. District &
Sessions Judge, Mandya (sitting at Srirangapatna).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. O.S.No.6 of 2014 was filed before the jurisdictional
civil Court by the respondent Nos.1 to 9 herein seeking the
relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule
property. The said suit was dismissed and as against the
judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.6 of 2014, the plaintiffs
NC: 2025:KHC:50364
HC-KAR
have filed R.A.No.5067 of 2017, which is pending consideration
before the Court of III Additional District & Sessions Judge at
Mandya (sitting at Srirangapatna). In the said appeal, I.A.No.II
was filed under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC with a prayer to amend
the plaint and I.A.No.III was filed under Order XIV Rule 5 R/w
Section 151 of CPC with a prayer to frame additional issue. The
said applications were opposed by the petitioner herein. The
appellate Court vide separate orders dated 24.02.2023 had
allowed I.A.No.II and I.A.No.III filed in R.A.No.5067 of 2017
and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner / defendant
No.4 is before this Court.
4. Perusal of the material on record would go to show
that the first appellate Court on 19.02.2021 having placed
reliance on the judgment of this Court reported in 2013(2)
KAR.L.J.734 had held that I.A.No.II and I.A.No.III is required
to be considered along with the main appeal. Subsequently,
vide the order impugned dated 24.02.2023 the said
applications have been allowed by the first appellate Court and
the plaintiff has been permitted to amend the plaint and on the
very same day an additional issue is also framed based on the
NC: 2025:KHC:50364
HC-KAR
amendment of the pleadings in the plaint as prayed for in
I.A.No.II. In my considered opinion, since the first appellate
Court by order dated 19.02.2021 had already held that
I.A.No.II and I.A.No.III is required to be heard simultaneously
along with main appeal, the impugned order which is now
passed during the pendency of the main appeal cannot be
sustained.
5. Accordingly, the following:-
ORDER
(i) Writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 24.02.2023
passed on I.A.No.II and I.A.No.III in
R.A.No.5067 of 2017 are set aside and the
appellate Court is directed to consider the
said applications along with main matter.
(iii) All contentions urged by both the parties
are left open.
Pending IAs' do not survive for consideration and
accordingly the same are disposed of.
Sd/-
(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
NMS/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23
