- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22178 WP No. 15620 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 15620 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. ESHWARAPPA S/O GIRIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, R/O VITTALAPURA, NERALEKERE POST, AMRUTHAPURA HOBLI, TALUK: TARIKERE, PIN CODE-577228 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DESAI S.V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT, CHIKMAGALUR-577101 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TARIKERE SUB-DIVISION, TARIKERE TALUK, PIN CODE - 577228 4. THE TAHASILDAR OF TARIKERE TALUK TARIKERE, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT, PIN CODE-577228 Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22178 WP No. 15620 of 2019 5. V.G.SHIVAPPA S/O GANGADHARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, 6. P.ESHWARAPPA S/O PUTTAGIRIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, 7. V.N.ONKARAPPA S/O NANJUNDAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 8. H.B. CHANNABASAPPA S/O BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, B.R.JAYAPPA S/O RAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, DIED - WHEREABOUT OF LRS ARE NOT KNOWN 9TH APPLICANT IN I.A. FOR IMPLEADING DIED 9. PUTTASWAMY S/O NANJUNDAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 10. V.N.BASAVARAJAPPA S/O NANJUNDAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 11. MAHESHWARAPPA S/O RAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 12. M.B. LINGAMARIYAPPA S/O RAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 13. K.HALAPPA S/O KARIBASAPPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22178 WP No. 15620 of 2019 14. ESHWARAPPA S/O KARIBASAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 15. MANJUNATHA S/O MALLIKARJUNAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 16. RUDRAPPA S/O BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 17. V.M.YOGISH S/O MALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 18. V.S.HALAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 19. M.NEELAKANTAPPA S/O MALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDENT OF VITTALAPUR VILLAGE, AMRITHAPURA HOBLI, TARIKERE TALUK CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577228 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JAYALINGAYYA MUDENOORMATH, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 4; SRI.A.G. BOPAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.5 TO 11, 14, 15, 17 AND 18; NOTICE SERVED ON RESPONDENT NOS.16 AND 19; VIDE ORDER DATED 13.10.2023, PETITION AGAINST RESPONDENT NOS.12 AND 13 IS DISMISSED AS ABATED; VIDE ORDER DATED 28.03.2025, PETITION STANDS DISMISSED AGAINST RESPONDENT NO.8) - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22178 WP No. 15620 of 2019 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 06.03.2019 (ANNEXURE-'S') PASSED ON I.A.NO.5 IN O.S.NO.240/2011 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE & ADDITIONAL JMFC, TARIKERE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This petition is filed seeking following reliefs:- i) Writ of Certiorari to Set-aside the Order dated 06.03.2019 (Annexure-'S') passed on I.A.No.5 in O.S.No.240/2011 passed by the Civil Judge & Additional JMFC, Tarikere. ii) Pass any order or direction court deems fit to meet the ends of justice. 2. Heard Sri. Desai S.V., learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. A.G. Bopaiah, learned counsel for private respondents and Sri. Jayalingayya Mudenoormath, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a suit for permanent injunction against the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22178 WP No. 15620 of 2019 State Government and its officials on the ground that he has purchased the suit schedule property wayback in the year 1948 and thereafter, he has developed a plantation to the entire extent of 5 acres 11 guntas of land and to that effect, substantial material is placed before the Court. The said suit was properly defended by the State by filing a written statement and adducing substantial evidence. At that point of time, some of the villagers filed an application under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of CPC seeking for impleadment in the said suit, which came to be allowed without appreciating the fact that the suit is at the concluding stage and sufficient evidence was adduced and the villagers are not proper and necessary parties to adjudicate the dispute. It is submitted that the villagers claimed that certain portion of the land, which is in possession of the petitioner is a kharab land. However, the said issue is pending before this Court in W.P.No.8482/2022. Hence, the application of the villagers for impleadment may be rejected by setting aside the impugned order. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22178 WP No. 15620 of 2019 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents supports the impugned order and submits that the revenue records and other documents clearly indicate that 1 acre 39 guntas of land in Sy.No.3/1 of Obalapura, Amruthapura Hobli, Tarikere Taluk is a kharab land and it is a katte, which is meant for use by the villagers. The villagers have made number of representations, complaints to the authorities and requested them to remove the encroachment. However, they could not take any steps and when the villagers came to know that the suit is filed by the petitioner, they filed an application for impleadment. It is submitted that the villagers are not claiming any right over the property but they have absolute right to use the said property. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 supports the impugned order and seeks to dismiss the writ petition. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the private respondents and the learned - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22178 WP No. 15620 of 2019 Additional Government Advocate and perused the material available on record. 7. The petitioner filed O.S.No.240/2011 and the same is pending before the Civil Judge and Additional JMFC, Tarikere. The said suit is for the relief of permanent injunction against the defendants. In the said suit, the State Government, Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, Tahsildar are arrayed as parties to the proceedings. The relief is based on the assertion that the petitioner is in possession of entire extent of 5 acres 11 guntas of land in Sy.No.3/1 of Obalapura, Amrutapura Hobli, Tarikere Taluk. The official respondents filed a written statement and they have denied the assertion of the plaint averments and specifically contended that 1 acre 39 guntas of land is katte and the entire ownership of the said land is with the State Government and the petitioner has encroached the said land. The matter is now posted for further arguments. Meantime, the private respondents in this petition filed an application seeking for impleadment. The Trial Court considering the nature of assertion made in the application, allowed the said application for impleadment. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22178 WP No. 15620 of 2019 8. I have gone through the material available on record and the order of the Trial Court. It is seriously disputed by the parties that 1 acre 39 guntas is a katte, which is kharab land and is in occupation of the petitioner. The said issue is now sub-judice before this Court in W.P.No.8482/2022 and that being the position, it would not be appropriate for this Court to record any finding with regard to the nature of the land to an extent of 1 acre 39 guntas. Be that as it may, the villagers, who claimed that 1 acre 39 guntas of land is a katte and it is meant to be used by them, intend to come on record to assist the Court and they have approached the defendants - authorities and at their instance, the revenue authorities have initiated the proceedings and now Deputy Commissioner has passed order, which is under challenge in W.P.No.8482/2022. In my considered view, there is no error in the order of the Trial Court impleading the private respondents as parties to the suit. Mere addition of the private respondents would not amount to denial of relief in the suit. It is always open for the petitioner to contend before the Trial Court that the private respondents are not necessary parties at the time of final arguments. The private respondents have a right to use the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22178 WP No. 15620 of 2019 said land, if the authority comes to the conclusion that 1 acre 39 guntas is a katte. That being so, I am of the considered view that the Trial Court is fully justified in allowing the application. 9. The writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is rejected. I.A.No.1/2019 also stands rejected. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE PMR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14