[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Kum H V Madhushree vs Obalagiriyappa on 11 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
W.P. No.2566/2020
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
WRIT PETITION NO.2566/2020 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
KUM. H.V. MADHUSHREE
D/O RAJANNA @ RANGAIAH
AND LATE O. VANAJAKSHI
Digitally signed AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
by ARSHIFA R/A C/O N. PUTTALINGAPPA
BAHAR KHANAM VEDAVATHI NAGARA
Location: HIGH NEAR MASJID, HIRIYUR
COURT OF
KARNATAKA CHITRADURGA-577598.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MURTHY K, ADV.,)
AND:
1. OBALAGIRIYAPPA
S/O SANA HANUMANTHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS
HEMADALA VILLAGE
IMANGALA HOBLI, HIRIYUR TALUK
CHITRADURGA -577598.
ANJANAPPA
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS
2. SMT. GANGAMMA
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS.
3. SRI. RAJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
W.P. No.2566/2020
HC-KAR
4. SRI. SUJATHA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.
5. SRI. SREEDHAR
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.
6. SMT. SAVITHA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS.
RESPONDENT NO.2 IS WIFE AND
RESPONDENTS NO.3 TO 6 ARE
THE CHILDREN OF LATE ANJANAPPA.
ALL ARE R/AT. WATER TANK ROAD
HIRIYUR TALUK
CHITRADURGA-577598.
7. SRI. RAMANNA
S/O SANNA HANUMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
NEAR AMBEDKAR BEEDI
CHITRADURGA-577598.
DODDAKKA
SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS
8. SRI. N. PUTTALINGAPPA
S/O NINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS.
9. SMT. N.P. NIRMALA
D/O PUTTALINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.
10. SRI. P. PURUSHOTAMA
S/O PUTTALINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.
11. SRI. P. THIPPESWAMY
S/O LATE PUTTALINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
W.P. No.2566/2020
HC-KAR
RESPONDENTS NO.8 TO 11 ARE
R/AT. 3RD WARD, VEDAVATHINAGRA
NEAR MEKKA MASIDI, HIRIYUR TOWN
CHITRADURGA-577598.
KAMALAMMA
SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS
12. SRI. K.T. GOWDA
S/O MUDLAPPA
AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS.
13. SRI. EKANTHA GOWDA
S/O K.T. GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.
14. SMT. K. NALINAKSHI
D/O K.T. GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.
15. SRI. K.V. PRASAD
S/O K.T. GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS.
RESPONDENTS NO.12 TO 15 ARE
R/AT. UMA NILAYA
BESIDE EXCISE OFFICE
KHB COLONY, T R NAGARA
CHALLAKERE TOWN AND POST
CHITRADURGA-577598.
LAKSHMIDEVI
DEAD BY LRS
DEFENDANTS NO. 6 AND 8
ARE ALL ON RECORD.
16. SMT. THIPPAMMA
D/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
R/A NO.43, IST MAIN
5TH CROSS, OPP MARIYAMMA TEMPLE
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
W.P. No.2566/2020
HC-KAR
MALLAPPA BADAVANE, BABASPALYA
KALYANA NAGAR, BANGALORE.
17. SMT. CHIKKA HANUMAKKA
W/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
R/A HEMADALA VILLAGE
AIMANGALA HOBLI
HIRIYUR TALUK
CHITRADURGA-577598.
18. SRI. L. HANUMANTHAPPA
W/O LATE LENKAPPA
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS.
GOPALAPPA
SINCE DEAD BY LRS.
19. SMT. PUTTARANGAMMA
W/O LATE GOPALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS.
20. SRI. BHANUPRAKASH
S/O LATE GOPALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS.
21. SMT. RADHAMMA
D/O LATE GOPALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS.
22. KUM. VINUTHA
D/O LATE GOPALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS.
23. KUM. KAVYA
D/O LATE GOPALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS.
RESPONDENTS NO.18 TO 23 ARE
R/A HEMADALA VILLAGE
AIMANHALA HOBLI
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
W.P. No.2566/2020
HC-KAR
HIRIYUR TALUK
CHITRADURGA-577598.
24. SRI. P. HARIYAPPA
S/O PATHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS.
HANUMANTHAPPA
DEAD BY HIS UNMARRIED
SISTER B. BHAGYAMMA
IS ALREADY ON RECORD
THOPAMMA DEAD HIS LRS
DEFENDANTS NO.6 AND 8 ARE ON RECORD.
25. SMT. B. BHAGYAMMA
D/O BALADANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.
26. THOPAMMA
W/O BALADANDAPPA
DEAD BY LRS.
KECHAMMA
DEAD SINCE BY HER LRS
PLAINTIFFS NO.4, 5 AND 6 AND
DEFENDANTS NO. 3 TO 9 ARE
ALREADY ON RECORD.
RESPONDENTS NO.24 & 25 ARE
R/A HEMADALA VILLAGE
AIMANHALA HOBLI
HIRIYUR TALUK
CHITRADURGA-577598.
27. SRI. T. SHIVAPPA NAYAKA
S/O TYARAMALLA NAYAKA
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/A HEMADALA VILLAGE
AIMANHALA HOBLI
HIRIYUR TALUK
CHITRADURGA-577598.
-6-
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
W.P. No.2566/2020
HC-KAR
28. SMT. MEENAKSHAMMA
W/O HARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS.
29. SRI. DINESH
S/O HARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
30. SMT. GIRIJAMMA
D/O HARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS.
31. SMT. LAKSHMIDEVAMMA
W/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS.
32. SRI. H.R. MUNISWAMY
S/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.
33. SMT. KENCHAMMA
W/O SIDDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS.
34. SMT. RUDRAMMA
D/O SIDDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
35. SMT. LAKSHMIDEVI
W/O CHANNABASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.
36. SMT. SRIDEVI
D/O CHANNABASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS.
RESPONDENTS NO.27 TO 35 ARE
R/A HEMADALA VILLAGE
AIMANHALA HOBLI
HIRIYUR TALUK
CHITRADURGA-577598.
-7-
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
W.P. No.2566/2020
HC-KAR
37. SRI. C.H. SIDDAPPA
S/O CHIKKA HANUMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/A HEMADALA VILLAGE
AIMANGALA HOBLI
HIRIYUR TALUK
CHITRADURGA-577598.
38. SRI. CHANNABASAPPA
S/O CHIKKA HANUMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
R/A HEMADALA VILLAGE
AIMANHALA HOBLI
HIRIYUR TALUK
CHITRADURGA-577598.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. AVINASH P, ADV., FOR R16
R1 TO 6 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED
NOTICE TO R8 TO R38 IS D/W V/O/DTD:19.06.2023
NOTICE TO R7 IS H/S V/O/DTD:27.07.2025)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS SET ASIDE THE ORDER AT ANNEXURE-A, THE
ORDERS ON I.A.NO.32 UNDER ORDER XXII RULE 3 R/W
SECTION 151 OF CPC DATED 7.12.2019 PASSED BY THE
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HIRIYUR IN
O.S.NO.115/2006 AND ALLOW I.A.NO.32 BY ALLOWING THIS
WRIT PETITION & ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
-8-
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
W.P. No.2566/2020
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
ORAL ORDER
This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated
07.12.2019 passed on IA.No.32 filed by the petitioner
under Order XXII Rule 3 r/w Section 151 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the CPC') in
O.S.No.115/2006.
2. Sri.Murthy K., learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner submits that Sri.Obalagiriyappa and others,
including the mother of the petitioner, had filed a suit for
partition and separate possession. During the pendency of
the said suit, plaintiff No.6 - Smt. Vanajamma died on
20.05.2016. Hence, the petitioner, who is the daughter of
Smt.Vanajamma/plaintiff No.6 filed an application to come
on record. It is submitted that the trial court, after
conducting a detailed enquiry, rejected the said application
solely on the ground that the name of the father of the
petitioner is mentioned as Sri.Rajanna or Rangaiah in all
the documents. Whereas, his actual name is Sri.Rangappa.
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
HC-KAR
It is further submitted that the trial Court has failed to
consider Ex.P7 and the oral evidence of the petitioner in its
proper perspective. It is also submitted that except
plaintiff Nos. 1, 2 and 3 none of the parties to the suit
have opposed the said application. It is contended that
defendants Nos.1 to 3 have clearly admitted that the
petitioner is the daughter of plaintiff No.6. Due to strained
relationship between the deceased plaintiff
No.6/Smt.Vanajamma and her husband Rangappa, they
were residing separately. Hence, he seeks to allow the
petition.
3. Though notice has been served on the other
respondents, there is no representation on their behalf,
except respondent No.16, who was defendant No.1 in the
suit.
4. Learned counsel for defendant No.1 supports
the order of the trial Court and submits that the trial
Court, after conducting a detailed enquiry and on
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
HC-KAR
appreciation of the evidence on record, has rightly rejected
the application, holding that the petitioner has failed to
prove that she is the daughter of Plaintiff No.6. It is
submitted that the said order is a well reasoned order and
does not call for any interference. Hence, he seeks to
dismiss the petition.
5. I have heard the arguments on both the sides
and meticulously perused the material available on record.
6. The records indicate that one Obalagiriyappa
and 9 others have filed O.S.No.115/2006 before the
Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hiriyur, against the other
family members for partition and separate possession of
the suit schedule properties. The plaintiff No.6 in the said
suit is Smt.Vanajamma W/o Rangappa. It is averred that
plaintiff No.6 Smt.Vanajamma died on 20.05.2016, hence
the petitioner herein filed an application under Order XXII
Rule 3 read with Section 151 of CPC claiming to be the
sole legal representative of Smt.Vanajamma. The said
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
HC-KAR
application is numbered as Item No.32. Plaintiff Nos.1 to 3
filed objections to the said application stating that the
petitioner is not the legal representative of deceased
plaintiff No.6, hence, cannot maintain the application. The
other plaintiffs and the defendants have not opposed the
said application. It is to be noticed that the defendant
Nos.3 to 5 in the said suit have clearly admitted that the
petitioner is the sole legal representative of the deceased
Smt.Vanajamma. It is also stated that the petitioner
Smt.H.V.Madhusree is the daughter of Rajanna @
Rangaiah and the plaintiff No.6 deceased Smt.Vanajamma
was a divorced woman residing separately.
7. The trial Court conducted the enquiry as
provided under Rule 5 Order XXII of CPC and passed the
impugned order holding that the petitioner failed to prove
that she is the legal representative of the deceased
Smt.Vanajamma (plaintiff No.6). In order to substantiate
the claim, the petitioner herein examined herself before
the trial Court as AW-1 and got marked the documents as
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
HC-KAR
per Exs.A1 to A14. The plaintiff Nos.1 to 3 have got
marked Exs.P1 to P3.
8. The perusal of oral testimony in the petitioner
and the documents produced as per exhibits on record, it
is noticed that the petitioner has produced Genealogy Tree
as per Ex.A1, which indicates that she is the daughter of
Smt.Vanajamma-plaintiff No.6. The ration card as per
Ex.A2, indicates that the petitioner is the daughter of
plaintiff No.6 Smt.Vanajamma. The bank passbook as per
Ex.A4 also indicates the name of the petitioner as well as
the name of her mother plaintiff No.6 Smt.Vanajamma.
The Aadhaar card of the petitioner as per Ex.A3 indicates
the name of the petitioner as Madhusree H.V. and her
father's name as Rajanna. The death certificate of plaintiff
No.6 Smt.Vanajamma, which was produced and marked as
Ex.A5, clearly indicates the name of her husband as
Rajanna @ Rangaiah and the date of death is 20.05.2016.
In the plaint it is stated that Smt.Vanajamma W/o
Rangappa, which can be tallied with the death certificate
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
HC-KAR
and other documents produced before the trial Court by
the petitioner. The petitioner has produced the study
certificate as per Ex.A6, wherein name of the father of the
petitioner is written as Rajanna. The SSLC Marks card of
the petitioner marked as per Ex.A9 also refers the names
of the father and mother of the petitioner as Rajanna and
Vanajamma, who was also called as 'Vanajakshi'.
9. It is not in dispute that the name of plaintiff
No.6 Smt.Vanajamma is found in all the records of the
petitioner. In view of the said fact, in my considered view,
the petitioner has produced sufficient and legally
acceptable evidence before the trial Court to substantiate
that she is the daughter of the plaintiff No.6
Smt.Vanajamma. The trial Court, without appreciating the
school records, death certificate of the plaintiff No.6,
Aadhaar card of the petitioner and other records and the
oral testimony of the petitioner, proceeded to reject the
said application on appreciation minor discrepancy. In my
considered view, the said application deserves to be
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
HC-KAR
allowed taking into consideration the fact that the
petitioner is able to prove that she is the legal
representative of the deceased plaintiff No.6
Smt.Vanajamma.
10. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to
pass the following:
ORDER
i. Writ petition is allowed.
ii. The order dated 07.12.2019 passed on
I.A.No.32 in O.S.No.115/2006 by the Senior
Civil Judge and JMFC, Hiriyur, is hereby set
aside. Consequently, I.A.No.32 filed under
Order XXII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of
CPC is allowed. The petitioner herein, who is
the applicant in the said application, is
permitted to come on record before the trial
Court as the legal representative of deceased
plaintiff No.6 Smt.Vanajamma.
- 15 -
NC: 2026:KHC:14813
HC-KAR
iii. Plaintiffs in the suit shall amend the
cause title and file amended cause title before
the trial Court.
No order as to costs.
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
JUDGE
ABK,BSR
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18
