Back
Karnataka High Court
M.V.Rajashekhar - Appellant
Versus
M.V.Rajamma (deceased by L.Rs.) - Respondent
Decided On : 01-30-04
C.R.P. : 2685 of 2003
ABUSE OF PROCESS - Partition Suit - Section 151 of CPC - [Section 10 of CPC] - The court discussed the provisions of Section 10 of CPC and its application to the case. It highlighted the inherent power of the court under Section 151 of CPC and emphasized that the court has abundant inherent powers to prevent abuse of the process of the court by any of the parties. The court concluded that the impugned order staying the further proceedings in the previous suit was erroneous and not sustainable.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff filed a suit for partition and separate possession of properties. Defendant No. 1 executed a Will in favor of respondents during the pendency of the suit. The legatees initiated probate proceedings, which were converted into a subsequent suit pending before the High Court of Madras. The trial court stayed the proceedings of the earlier suit pending disposal of the subsequent suit.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the order staying the proceedings of the earlier suit was erroneous and not sustainable. It emphasized the application of Section 10 of CPC and the inherent power of the court under Section 151 of CPC to prevent abuse of the process of the court.
Issues: The main issue was whether the impugned order staying the further proceedings in the earlier suit was justified and liable to be interfered with.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the provisions of Section 10 of CPC and Section 151 of CPC to determine the correctness of the impugned order. It concluded that the order was erroneous and not sustainable.
Final Decision: The revision was allowed by setting aside the impugned order, and the parties were directed to bear their own costs.
( 1 ) THIS is the plaintiffs revision, being aggrieved of the Order passed in O. S. No. 292/1995 on the file of the I Addl. Civil judge (Sr. Dri.) an CJM. , Mysore, dated 10-6-2003, staying further proceedings of the suit pending disposal of O. S. No. 13/2000, pending before the High Court of Madras.
( 2 ) THE brief facts of the case are as follows : the plaintiff M. V. Rajashekhar filed O. S. No. 292/1995 against defendant Nos. 1 to 6 and others for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties described in Schedule "a, B, C, D and E, situated at Mysore and Madras. The plaintiffs father late M. C. Veerappa had two wives viz. , Smt. M. V. Rajamma and Smt. Meenakshamma. Defendant No. 1 Smt. M. V. Rajainma had no issues. Plaintiff and defendant Nos. 3 to 6 are the children of smt. Mt enakshamma through late M. C. Veerappa. After the death of Sri M. C. Veerappa, present suit O. S. No. 292/1995 was filed on 21-9-1995 for partition and separate possession of their respective shares. Defendant No. 1-Smt. M. V. Rajamma having entered appearance filed the written statement pleading that the entire suit schedule properties are of her self-acquired properties. It appears that defendant No. l smt. M. V. Rajamma executed a Will dated 31-3-1997 in favour of respondent Nos. 1 (a) to (e) during the pendency of the suit and she died on 23-4-1999. After the death of smt. M. V. Rajamma, the legatees who have been residing at Madras initiated probate proceedings in O. P. No. 862/1999 before the High Court of Madras. The plaintiff herein appeared before the High Court of madras on service of notice and filed objections. Thereafter, the probate proceedings came to be converted into original suit and numbered as O. S. No. 13/2000. At that stage, the legatees having come on record as legal representatives of Smt. M. V. Rajamma for a limited purpose filed an application under Section 10 of C. P. C. to stay the further proceedings in O. S. No. 292/ 1995, pending disposal of O. S. No. 13/2000, pending before the High Court of Madras. The learned I Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and C. J. M. , after hearing both the learned counsel, by his Order dated 10-6-2003 passed the impugned Order by exercising inherent powers under Section 151 of CPC staying the further proceedings of O. S. No. 292/1995, pending disposal of O. S. No. 13/ 2000, pending before the High Court of madras. It is this order, which is questioned in the present revision.
( 3 ) LEARNED Counsel Sri Y. K. Narayana sharma contended that the suit of the plaintiff is for partition and separate possession against defendant Nos. 1 to 6. The suit properties are the properties of his father late M. C. Veerappa. It appears that during the pendency of the partition suit, defendant no. 1 Smt. M. V. Rajamma executed a Will dated 31-3-1997 in favour of respondent nos. 1 (a) to (e) with an intent to defraud the plaintiff and other children of Smt. Meenakshama-2nd wife of late M. C. Veerappa. Learned counsel further contended that respondent Nos. 1 (a) to (e) claiming to be the legatees under the Will, initiated probate proceedings before the High court of Madras in O. P. No. 862/1999 and the same came to be converted into O. S. No. 13/2000. Therefore, contended that when an application is filed under Section 10 of C. P. C. , the learned I Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and CJM, has erred in exercising his inherent power under Section 151 of C. P. C. Section 10 of C. P. C. makes clear that it is the subsequent suit, which has to be stayed and not earlier suit. Also contended that this Court is entitled to exercise its inherent power under Section 151 of C. P. C. In the instant case, the very filing of the suit is for partition, wherein the proceedings before the High Court of Madras came to be initiated during 1999. Therefore, the learned i Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and CJM. , has apparently erred in staying the further proceedings of O. S. No. 292/1995 by invoking
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
