SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 9886

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CIVIL PETITION NO. 177 OF 2018 BETWEEN:

1. S.SHANMUKAPPA S/O LATE CHANNABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS SINCE DEAD BY LR’S

1A. SMT.S.DHARMMMA W/O LATE SHANMUKAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS

1B. SRI.S.S.SHIVAYOGI S/O LATE SHANMUKAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

1C. SRI.S.S.SANTHOSH KUMAR S/O. LATE SHANMUKAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS Digitally signed by 1D. SMT.S.S.VIJAYALAKSHMI SUVARNA T D/O LATE SHANMUKAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS Location:

HIGH

1E. SMT.S.S.ROHINI COURT OF D/O LATE SHANMUKAPPA KARNATAKA AGE ABOUT 44 YEARS PETITIONERS 1A TO 1E ARE R/O MADENAHALLI VILLAGE DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 1F. SMT.KUMADVATHI D/O LATE SHANMUKAPPA W/O BAVIGOWDRA YOGESHWARAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS RESIDENT OF HATTURU VILLAGE HONNALLI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B.K.MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. S.SHANKRAPPA S/O MAHADEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS AGRICULTURIST

2. MAHADEVAPPA S/O DODDABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS AGRICULTURIST 3. S.JAYAPPA S/O MAHADEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS AGRICULTURIST

4. UJJAPPA S/O DODDABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS AGRICULTURIST RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 ARE R/O MADENAHALLI VILLAGE, HONNALI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 5. SMT.KAMALAMMA W/O PARAMESHWARAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS AGRICULTURIST BALLURU VILLAGE SHIKARIPURA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT

6. SMT. HIRIYAMMA W/O VIRUPAKSHAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS AGRICULTURIST JAKKINAKOPPA VILALGE, SHIKARIPURA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT

7. MANJULA W/O RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS AGRICULTURIST KODAMAGGI VILLAGE, BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT

8. SRI.RAJENDRAPPA S/O SIDDABASAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR’S

8.1. KALAMMMA W/O RAJENDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, KATTIGE VILLAGE, HONNALI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT

8.2. VASANTHA S/O RAJENDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS.

KATTIGE VILLAGE, HONNALI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT

8.3. SANTHOSH S/O RAJENDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, KATTIGE VILLAGE, HONNALI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT

8.4. CHANNESH, S/O RAJENDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, KATTIGE VILLAGE, HONNALI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 9. SMT. BHARMAMMA W/O BASAVARAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS AGRICULTURIST R/O MADENAHALLI VILLAGE, HONNALI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT

10. CHANDRAPPA S/O MAHADEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS AGRICULTURIST R/O MADENAHALLI VILLAGE, HONNALI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT

11. SMT.NINGAMMA W/O MANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS AGRICULTURIST KANAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, SHIMOGA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT

12. THIMMAPPA S/O MANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS AGRICULTURIST KANAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, SHIMOGA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT

13. SIDDAPPA S/O MANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS AGRICULTURIST KANAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, SHIMOGA TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.S.RAJENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.S.V.PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R7 & R9 TO 13 R8(A), R8(D)- SERVED ON IA-2 TO IA-4/21 R8(B) & R8(C)- SERVED)

THIS CIVIL PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.24 OF CPC, PRAYING TO WITHDRAW R.A 85/2016 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED 1ST ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, DAVANGERE AND DISPOSE OF THE SAME ON MERITS ALONG WITH RFA

1413/2016 AND RFA 1841/2016 PENDING BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

Petitioner Advocates:B K MANJUNATH ,Respondent Advocate: S V PRAKASH FOR R1-R7 &

ORAL ORDER

The present petition is filed to withdraw R.A.No.85/2016 pending on the file of the Ist Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davangere and transfer the same to this Court to dispose off the same along with RFA No.1413/2016 and RFA No.1841/2016 pending before this Court.

2. The petitioner herein had filed O.S.No.10/2009 against the respondents on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Harihar, seeking declaration of title in respect of the schedule properties. O.S.No.135/2007 was filed by the respondents against the petitioner in respect of the very same properties on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT at Harihar seeking declaration and possession of the suit schedule properties and also for mandatory injunction. O.S.No.41/2009 was filed by the petitioner on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Honnally, seeking permanent injunction and the said suit was transferred to the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Harihar.

3. The trial Court had clubbed all the three suits and passed a common order whereby the suits filed by the petitioner as well as the suit filed by the respondents was dismissed. Thereafter, the petitioner being aggrieved by the common judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.41/2009 dated 23.04.2016 had preferred R.A.No.85/2016 before the Principal District and Sessions Court, Davangere. As against the order passed in O.S.No.10/2009, the petitioner had filed RFA.No.1413/2016 before this Court. Against the order passed in O.S.No.135/2016, RFA.No.1841/2016 is filed before this Court. Now, the present petition is filed seeking transfer of the R.A.No.85/2016 to this Court to be decided along with the pending RFA.No.1413/2016 and RFA.No.1841/2016.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the parties are one and the same and now, if these cases are decided separately, there is every scope for conflicting of judgments and it would cause lot of hardship to the petitioner. He submits that the respondents cannot have an objection if the same is transferred to this Court, the petitioner could be losing his right of appeal and the respondents cannot have any objection for transfer of the same.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the suits are in respect of the same properties and between the same parties, he has no objection to transfer the same. Hence, this Court is passing the following order:

ORDER

i. R.A.No.85/2016 pending on the file of the Ist Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davangere, is withdrawn and the same is transferred to this Court to be heard along with RFA.No.1413/2016 and RFA No.1814/2016.

ii. Accordingly, this Civil Petition is allowed iii. All I.As. in this Civil Petition shall stand closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top