ORDER

This petition by the Defendant Nos.1 to 3 in O.S.

No.364/2023 is directed against the impugned order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Kunigal [for short, 'trial Court'] whereby the application filed by the petitioners seeking clubbing of the said suit along with O.S. No.328/2023 was dismissed by the trial Court.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the material on record.

3. The material on record indicates that the petitioners herein are the defendants in O.S. No.364/2023 filed by one Smt. Gangamani, wife of Sri Narasimhamurthy against the petitioners for permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable properties. The said suit is being contested by the petitioners/defendants. In the meanwhile, one more suit in O.S. No.328/2023 has been instituted by Smt. Susheelamma, sister of the petitioners herein against the petitioners and other family members and in the said suit, the petitioners herein are arrayed as Defendant Nos.1 to 3.

4. The petitioners filed the instant application in O.S. No.364/2023 seeking clubbing/consolidation of both the suits on the ground that some of the properties which are subject matter of O.S. No.364/2023 are also subject matter of O.S. No.328/2023 and consequently, both the suits are required to be clubbed and disposed of together.

The said application was opposed by the plaintiff Smt. Gangamani who contended that she was not a party to O.S. No.328/2023 and was not a family member and as such, the question of clubbing both the suits would not arise.

5. After hearing both the parties, the trial Court took into account that Smt. Gangamani-plaintiff in O.S. No.364/2023 was not a party in O.S. No.328/2023 and since she was not a family member, merely because the subject matter of both the suits are identical, in the absence of Smt. Gangamani, clubbing/consolidation of both the suits would not arise in the facts and circumstances of the instant case and accordingly dismissed the application.

6. In my considered opinion the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity nor can the same be said to have caused miscarriage of justice warranting interference by this Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as held by the Apex Court in the case of Radhey Shyam Vs.

Chhabi Nath reported in (2015) 5 SCC 423. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed.