IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8179 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

INDIRA SADANANADA HEGDE W/O SADANANDA HEGDE D/O LATE K. NARAYANA RAO AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS G.P. ZACHARIADES O LTD.

P.O. BOX 5632, KINGDOM OF BAHRAIN PRESENTLY R/A NO. 202 KUDVA RESIDENCY, 2^ND FLOOR

20TH I CROSS, ASHWINI LAYOUT EJIPURA, BANGALORE - 560 047.

…PETITIONER (BY SMT. SAHANA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. YASHAS K., ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by DHANALAKSHMI AND:

MURTHY Location: H IGH COURTOF 1. SMT SHOBHA SUMEET KARNATAKA W/O SUMEET D/O LATE K. NARAYANA RAO AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS E.K.2 BUILDING, FLAT NO. 140 BLOCK MUHAINSNAH 4, DUBAI (UAE).

2. SMT. RAMA GOVIND KAMATH W/O LATE GOVIND KAMATH D/O LATE K. NARAYANA RAO AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS ALSHARIF WATER PURIFICATION PLANT CO. WLL P.O. BOX 26002, ADLIYA KINGDOM OF BAHRAIN.

3. SMT. KALYANI W/O LATE K. NARAYANA RAO AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS NO. 28, 5^TH A MAIN ROAD OBALAPPA GARDEN, K.R. ROAD BANGALORE 560 070.

R1 IS DEAD LR’S OF R1 ARE R2 TO R4.

4. SMT. PRABHAVATHI W/O KATEEL RUKMAIAH DAS D/O LATE K. NARAYANA RAO AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS. 5. SRI. KAPU MAHESH S/O K. NARAYAN RAO AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

6. SRI. SAMANTH S/O K. NARAYAN RAO AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R4 TO R6 ARE C/O SMT. KALYANI AND RESIDENTS OF PREMISES NO. 28 5^TH A MAIN ROAD OBALAPPA GARDEN K.R. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 070.

…RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING / SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25.02.2026 PASSED BY THE LEARNED 20^TH ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-32) BANGALORE REJECTING IA NO. II/26 FILED BY THE PLAINTIFFS U/S 151 OF CPC IN OS NO. 1050/2013 FOR CLUBBING THE CASES AT ANNEXURE-A AND PRAYING TO CLUB THE SUIT OF THE DEFENDANT NO. 3 IN OS NO. 7644/2024 WITH THE SAID SUIT OF THE PETITIONERS IN OS NO.

1050/2013 AND TO ALLOW THE SAID IA NO. II/26 AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

1. In this writ petition, the petitioner-plaintiff No.1 has called in question the order dated 25.02.2026 passed by the XX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as ‘Trial Court’ for short), on I.A.No.II/26 filed under Section 151 of the CPC vide Annexure-A, whereby the application seeking clubbing of O.S.No.1050/2013 with O.S.No.7644/2024 has been rejected.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Trial Court in Original Suit.

3. The petitioner–plaintiff has filed a suit for partition in O.S.No.1050/2013 before the XX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. In respect of the very same suit schedule property, defendant No.3 in O.S.No.1050/2013 has filed O.S.No.7644/2024 for partition. Hence, the petitioner herein-plaintiff filed an application seeking clubbing of both suits, which are pending before the same Court.

On an earlier occasion, defendant No.3 in O.S.No.1050/2013, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.7644/2024, had also filed a similar application seeking clubbing of the suits. The said application was dismissed on the ground that there was a direction from the High Court to dispose of O.S.No.1050/2013 within a stipulated time.

4. The present application filed by the petitioner– plaintiff no.1 in O.S.No.1050/2013 has been dismissed by the impugned order solely on the ground that there is a direction issued by the High Court in MFA No.4992/2016 to dispose of the said suit within six months.

5. Since both suits are for partition in the same Court, involve the same parties, and relate to the same property, and as both parties have no objection to clubbing and disposing of the suits together to avoid conflicting judgments, the trial court ought not to have rejected the application merely on the ground of the earlier direction of this Court.

6. In view of