Karnataka High Court
Smt Manasa vs Smt. Shanthamma on 25 March, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:12607
CP No. 8 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
CIVIL PETITION NO. 8 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
1. SMT.MANASA
WIFE OF LATE CETHAN KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KULUMEPALYA,
HUTRIDURGA HOBALI, KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMKUR DISTRICT- 572 126
2. KUM.SIRI
DAUGHTER OF LATE CHETHAN KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KULUMEPALYA,
HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKUR DISTRICT- 572 126
SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED
BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN
Digitally MOTHER SMT. MANASA
signed by ...PETITIONERS
SUVARNA T (BY SRI. PUNITH C., ADVOCATE)
Location:
HIGH AND:
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 1. SMT. SHANTHAMMA
DAUGHTER OF LATE VENKATARAMANACHAR,
WIFE OF NANJACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
RESIDING AT #170, 3RD STAGE,
4TH BLOCK, JC NAGAR,
NEAR IYYAPPA STORE,
BASAVESHWARANAGARA,
BENGALORE -560 079
2. SMT. RATHNAMMA,
DAUGHTER OF LATE VENKATARAMANACHAR,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:12607
CP No. 8 of 2025
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NEAR GOVET SCHOOL,
MAGADI MAIN ROAD,
CHIKKAGOLLARAHATTI,
BANGALORE -560 091
3. SMT. NAGALAKSHMI,
WIFE OF LATE SHIVANNACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KULUMEPALYA,
HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT- 572 126
4. SRI.VENKATESHCHAR,
SON OF LATE SHIVANNACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KULUMEPALYA,
HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT- 572 126
5. SRI.SRINIVASACHAR,
SON OF LATE SHIVANNACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KULUMEPALYA,
HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT- 572 126
6. SRI.LAKSHMINARAYANA,
SON OF LATE SHIVANNACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KULUMEPALYA,
HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 126
7. SMT.RATHNAMMA,
WIFE OF LATE RAJANNACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KULUMEPALYA,
HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 126
8. SMT.SUMITHRA,
DAUGHTER OF LATE RAJANNACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KULUMEPALYA,
HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK,
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:12607
CP No. 8 of 2025
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 126
9. SMT.RAJAMMA,
DAUGHTER OF LATE RAJANNACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KULUMEPALYA,
HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 126
10. SMT.ASHA,
DAUGHTER OF LATE RAJANNACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KULUMEPALYA,
HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 126
11. SMT.DIVYA,
DAUGHTER OF LATE RAJANNACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KULUMEPALYA,
HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 126
12. SMT. SHASHIKALA,
DAUGHTER OF LATE RAJANNACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NEAR GOVT SCHOOL,
MAGADI MAIN ROAD,
CHIKKAGOLLARAHATTI,
BANGALORE -560 091
13. KUM.NETRAVATHI.H.E,
DAUGHTER OF LATE ESHWARACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
RESIDING AT HONARAYANAHALLI,
MADALAKOTE, NELAMANGALA,
BANGALORE -562 123
14. SMT.GANGAMMA,
DAUGHTER OF LATE VENKATARAMANACHAR,
WIFE OF GOPALACHAR,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KULUMEPALYA,
HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK,
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 126
...RESPONDENTS
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:12607
CP No. 8 of 2025
(R1- SERVICE OF NOTICE IS HELD SUFFICIENT V.C.O.
DT:27.02.2025
R3- R7 & R9 TO R11- SERVICE OF NOTICE IS DISPENSED WITH
V.C.O. DT: 21.03.2025
R2, R8, R12, R13 & R14 ARE SERVED)
THIS CP FILED U/S. 24 OF CPC 1908, PRAYING TO
WITHDRAW THE SUIT IN OS NO.4817/2022 NOW PENDING ON THE
FILE OF I ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BANGALORE (CCH-2) AND TO TRANSFER TO THE COURT OF PRL.
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUNIGAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE AND TO
WITHDRAW THE SUIT IN OS NO.325/2023 NOW PENDING ON THE
FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUNIGAL AND TO
TRANSFER TO THE I ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BANGALORE (CCH-2), WHERE IN OS NO.4817/2022 IS PENDING.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
ORAL ORDER
The present petition is filed seeking transfer of
O.S.No.4817/2022 pending on the file of the I Addl. City Civil
Sessions Judge, Bangalore to the Court of Principal Civil Judge
and JMFC, Kunigal or in the alternative to withdraw the suit in
O.S No. 325/2023 pending on the file of the Principal Civil
Judge and JMFC, Kunigal and to transfer it to the I Additional
City Civil and Session Judge, Bangalore.
2. It is submitted that the petitioners before this court are
the defendant Nos.1 and 2 in the suit that are filed before the
NC: 2025:KHC:12607
Courts at Bangalore i.e., O.S.4817/2022 and they are arrayed
as defendant Nos.11 and 12 in O.S.325/2025 filed before the
Kunigal Court.
3. It is submitted that in both the cases schedule
properties are five in number, out of that four properties are
within the jurisdiction of Kunigal court and one property is
within the jurisdiction of Bangalore Court. The sister-in-law of
the petitioner herein has filed the suit in Bangalore. Thereafter,
respondent No.2 in the present case has filed the suit before
the courts at Kunigal. It is submitted that in the suit at
Bangalore, there are only 3 defendants whereas in the suit filed
by the respondent herein, there are about 14 defendants in the
suit. It is submitted that the suit is a comprehensive suit which
is filed before the court at Kunigal and he submits that he has
no objection either to transfer the pending suit from Kunigal to
Bangalore or Bangalore to Kunigal but the purpose of filing this
petition is if both the suits are decided by the same court, there
will not be any scope for conflicting of judgments and it would
be in the interest of both the parties.
NC: 2025:KHC:12607
4. Respondent Nos.1,2,8,12,13,14 are served and no
vakalath is filed on their behalf. On 27.02.2025 notice to R-1 is
held sufficient and by order dated 21.03.2025 notice to R-3 to
R-7 and R-9 to R-11 is dispensed with at the risk of the
appellant.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,
perused the material on record. The material on record
discloses that one suit is filed before the Courts at Bangalore,
other is filed at Kunigal. Both the cases are filed seeking relief
of partition. In the suit at Bangalore there are only 3
respondents whereas in the suit at Kunigal there are 14
defendants and four of the properties are situated at Kunigal
and only one property is situated at Bangalore.
6. Considering the fact that the suit is between the same
parties and the properties are also same, it would be in the
interest of the parties and also to avoid conflicting of the
judgment. This court deems it appropriate to pass the
following:
NC: 2025:KHC:12607
ORDER
i. The O.S.No.4817/2022 pending on the file
of the I Additional City Civil & Sessions
Judge, Bangalore is withdrawn and
transferred to the Principal Civil Judge and
JMFC Court, Kunigal to be tried along with
O.S.No.325/2023.
ii. Accordingly, the Civil Petition is Allowed.
iii. All pending I.As., in the civil petition shall
stand closed.
SD/-
(LALITHA KANNEGANTI)
JUDGE
TS
