- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6004 WP No. 645 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 645 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. G SUDHIR REDDY S/O G NARAYANA REDDY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS NO.42 K T ROAD, 5TH CROSS T DASARAHALLI BENGALURU- 560057. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAHUL DEV S DESHAMUORE.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. MAQSOOD M ALI S/O LATE MEHAMOOD ALI AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS 2. SRI. ABDUR REHMAN S/O SRI MAQSOOD M ALI AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 3. MS TASMIA D/O SRI MAQSOOD M ALI AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS 4. M/S MAQSOOD AND MAQDOOM BENEFIT TRUST Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6004 WP No. 645 of 2025 REP. BY MAQSOOD M ALI (TRUSTEE) R1 TO R4 ARE R/AT C/O ALI ESTATE, VASUDEVAPURA VILLAGE YELAHANKA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU-560064. 5. M/S MAQSOOD AND MAQDOOM BENEFIT TURST (REGISTERED TRUST) REP. BY RESIGTERED IRREVOCABLE GNERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER DATED 06-08-2014 MR.RAJEEV KUMAR S/O BALDEV RAJ KUMAR AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT NO.32 ‘ANGASANA’ RAJANAKUNTE BANGALORE-560064. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAZEEMA TASNEEM, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.S. MUKARRAM.,ADVOCATE FOR C/R1: NOTICE TO R2 TO R4 ARE DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED: 11.02.2025) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15/10/2024, PASSED BY THE XL ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU, IN OS NO. 5592 OF 2016 ON IA NO. 9 (ANNEXURE-A) AND DISMISS IA NO. 9 (ANNEXURE- A) FILED IN OS NO. 5592 OF 2016 BEFORE THE XL ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6004 WP No. 645 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER 1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff, challenging the order dated 15.10.2024 passed by the XL Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru on I.A.No.9 filed by respondent No.5 herein under Order I Rule 10 of CPC in O.S.No.5592/2016, whereby the trial Court has allowed the said application. 2. The plaintiff has filed the suit for injunction. In the plaint, the plaintiff has made M/s.Maqsood and Maqdoom Benefit Trust as defendant No.4 represented by its Trustee one Sri Maqsood M.Ali. The summons has been served on defendant No.4/Trust. Since nobody represented the Trust, it was placed exparte before the trial Court on 25.03.2017. When the matter was posted for hearing on IAs, the impleading applicant i.e. respondent No.5 herein filed I.A.No.9 under Order I Rule 10(2) of CPC for impleading him as party to the suit. The trial Court by - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6004 WP No. 645 of 2025 impugned order dated 15.10.2024 has allowed the said application and permitted the impleading applicant to come on record. Being aggrieved by the same, the writ petition is filed. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused the petition papers. 4. The plaintiff has filed a suit for an injunction. The plaintiff has already made M/s.Maqsood and Maqdoom Benefit Trust as defendant No.4 in the suit, represented by its Trustee, Sri Maqsood M. Ali. The summons has also been served on defendant No.4/Trust. Since nobody represented the Trust, it was placed exparte before the trial Court. When the matter was posted for hearing on IAs, respondent No.5 herein filed I.A.No.9 under Order I Rule 10(2) of the CPC for impleading, on the ground that the Trustee of defendant No.4/Trust had executed a General Power of Attorney (GPA) in favor of the impleading applicant, Mr. Rajeev Kumar. Since he is the necessary party to the suit, he filed an application for - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:6004 WP No. 645 of 2025 impleading. The Trust is already a party as defendant No.4 before the trial Court. However, the contention of the impleading applicant that the Trustee of defendant No.4 executed a GPA in his favor on 06.08.2014 and hence he filed an application for impleading, cannot be accepted. 5. Since the Trustee is already a party in the suit as defendant No.4, the Trust cannot be impleaded again as a defendant. When the proposed impleading applicant holds a GPA representing the Trust, his remedy would be to file an application for recalling the exparte order dated 25.03.2017 and to file an application under Order III Rule 2 of CPC to represent defendant No.4/Trust. Instead, he has filed an application for impleading the Trust as defendant No.5. Under these circumstances, I am of the opinion that the trial Court has erred in allowing the application and permitting the Trust to be impleaded as defendant No.5 in the suit. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:6004 WP No. 645 of 2025 6. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER a) The writ petition is allowed. b) The order dated 15.10.2024 passed by the XL Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru on I.A.No.9 filed under Order I Rule 10 of CPC in O.S.No.5592/2016, is set aside. c) Liberty is reserved to the GPA Holder of the Trust i.e. Rajeev Kumar to file a necessary application for recalling exparte order dated 25.03.2017 and represent respondent No.4-Trust. d) If such an application is filed, the trial Court is directed to consider the same, in accordance with law. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE HA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22