- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10417 WP No. 53505 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 53505 OF 2017 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. BEDORU MALLAPPA S/O. LATE CHIKKA BYANNA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT: KURUBARAPET, SHIDDLAGHATTA TOWN, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562 105. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. G A SRIKANTE GOWDA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SABJAN SAB S/O. LATE ELEKATTU AJIJ SAB, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, 2. FARAHATHUNNISSA W/O. LATE MAJID, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, 3. PARVIN TAJ D/O. LATE MAJID, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, 4. MUBIN TAJ D/O. LATE MAJID, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10417 WP No. 53505 of 2017 5. M. ZABIULLA S/O. LATE MAJID, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, 6. SHAMEEM TAJ D/O. LATE MAJID, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 7. M. SAMIULLA S/O. LATE MAJID, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT DIBBURALLI ROAD, AJADNAGAR, NEAR AMIRBABA DARGA, SIDLAGHATTA TOWN, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562 105. 8. 8(a) 8(b) VENKATANARAYANAIAH SINCE DEAD BY LRS SMT. KAMALAMMA W/O S.N. VENKATA RATNAIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS OCCUPATION AGRICULTURE R/O BASWESHWARNAGAR BENGALURU. SMT. MANJULA W/O V. VASANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCCUPATION AGRICULTURE R/O RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU. 8(c) SMT. VIJALAKSHMI W/O LAKSHMI NARAYANNAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10417 WP No. 53505 of 2017 OCCUPATION AGRICULTURE R/O RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU. 8(d) SRI. V. RAMAKRISHNA S/O LATE VENKATA NARAYANAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS OCCUPATION AGRICULTURE R/O SHANKARA MATTA ROAD SIDLAGATTA CHIKABALPURA DISTRICT - 562 105. 9. AHAMAD S/O. KHASIM SAB, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/A SANTOSHNAGAR, SIDLAGHATTA TOWN. 10. HUSAINBI D/O. KHASIMSAB, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT FILATURE QUARTERS, SIDLAGHATTA TOWN. 11. SYED MOULA S/O. LATE SHARFUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT MAHABOOBNAGAR, SIDLAGHATTA TOWN. 12. BABU S/O. LATE SHARFUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT MAHABOOBNAGAR, SIDLAGHATTA TOWN. 13. MEENA D/O. KHASIM SAB, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10417 WP No. 53505 of 2017 W/O. AMIN SAB, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT AZADNAGAR, SIDLAGHATTA TOWN. 14. MAHAMOODA D/O. KHASIM SAB, W/O. AMIN SAB, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT AZADNAGAR, SIDLAGHATTA TOWN. 15. DODDA VALIBASHA S/O. LATE ABDUL SATTARSAB, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 16. VALIBASHA S/O. LATE ABDUL SATTARSAB, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 17. GULABJAN D/O. LATE ABDUL SATTARSAB, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT BASAVAPURA VILLAGE, PAPATHIMMANAHALLI POST, CHILAKALANERPU HOBLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK. 18. BABUSAB S/O. LATE ABDUL SATTAR SAB, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 19. SHAMSHAD D/O. LATE ABDUL SATTAR SAB, W/O. MOHIDEENSAB, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10417 WP No. 53505 of 2017 20. SHAHEENA D/O. LATE ABDUL SATTAR SAB, W/O. MAHABOOBSAB, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, 21. BEEBIJAN D/O. LATE ABDUL SATTAR SAB, W/O. KHADARSAB, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 22. SHAFI S/O. LATE ABDUL SATTAR SAB, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT BASAVAPURA VILLAGE, PAPATHIMMANAHALLI POST, CHILAKALANERPU HOBLI, CHINTAMANI TALUK. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JAVEED S., ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R7; V/O DATED: 02.03.2018 NOTICE TO R9 TO R22 D/W V/O DATED 17.03.2022 PETITION AGAINST R8 (a TO d) DISMISSED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF CONSITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09.11.2017 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SIDLAGHATTA ON IA NO.1 IN FDP NO.22/2013 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:10417 WP No. 53505 of 2017 ORAL ORDER Petitioner who has sought to implead himself as a party- respondent in final decree proceedings in FDP No.22/2013 is before this Court aggrieved by the rejection of his application filed by him under order 1 Rule 10(2) of CPC. 2. The aforesaid final decree proceedings in FDP No.22/2013 has been initiated by the respondents herein seeking drawing up of final decree pursuant to preliminary decree that was passed in O.S.No.484/1982 which had been filed for relief of partition and separate possession amongst the respondents herein. One of the parties to the said suit in O.S.No.484/1982 is Sri.Venkatanarayanappa (who was defendant No.1 in the said suit). The said suit in O.S.No.484/1982 was decreed as under; "22. The plaintiff has proved that he acquired 1/3rd share in the suit property under the sale- deed dated 27.2.1971, executed by PWs 1 and 2 in his favour. The first defendant has, failed to prove that he acquired title to the entire suit property under Ex.D1. But he has acquired only 7/12 share of deceased Dastagirsab, under the said document. The defendant No.1 has failed to prove that Mohamed Dastgirsab had perfected his title to the suit property by adverse possession. The suit is not properly valued and the plaintiff is liable to pay an additional court fee of Rs.67-50. On payment of the said court fee the plaintiff shall be entitled for partition of his 1/3 share in the suit - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:10417 WP No. 53505 of 2017 property and the same shall be effected by the collector under section 54 CPC. The defendant No.1 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs. 200/- being past mesne profits to the plaintiff. There shall be an enquiry under order 20 rule 12 C.P.C.. regarding the quantum of mesne profits realised by the first defendant in respect of the suit property from the date of suit till the date on which the plaintiff is put in actual possession of his share of property, and the same shall be paid to the plaintiff. The defendant No.1 is also directed to pay the costs of the suit to the plaintiff. Advocate's fee is fixed at Rs.250/-." 3. The petitioner herein claims to have purchased the portion of the property subject matter of the said suit in O.S.No.484/1982 from the aforesaid Venkatanarayappa. Thus, it is contended that petitioner herein is entitled for the property that was held in favour of said Venkatanarayanappa to the extent of 7/12th share. 4. The suit in O.S.No.196/1999 is filed by the petitioner herein pursuant to the decree passed in the aforesaid O.S.No.484/1982. In the said suit-O.S.No.196/1999 following order is passed; "The suit of the first plaintiff is decreed in part with no order as to costs as follows; - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:10417 WP No. 53505 of 2017 The suit of the first plaintiff with respect of the prayer of declaration of his title over the plaint schedule property is dismissed. The defendants or and persons claiming through or under them are restrained by way of permanent injunction from interfering with the possession of the first plaintiff over the plaint schedule property in any manner till the conclusion of the proceedings in OS No.484/82 and till the first plaintiff is put in possession of his 7/12th share or till the defendant No.3 and 4 are put in possession of their separate share in the plaint schedule property." 5. Present final decree proceedings as noted above is filed pursuant to the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.484/1982. In view of the aforesaid orders passed in the aforesaid two suits, petitioner who is entitled for 7/12th share in the suit schedule property sought to implead himself as party - respondent for final adjudication of the matter and for allotment of his 7/12th share. The Trial Court by the impugned order rejected the said application. Aggrieved by which, petitioner is before this Court. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:10417 WP No. 53505 of 2017 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner appearing through video conferencing submits that in view of the specific orders passed in O.S.No.196/1999 which has attained finality the present proceedings in FDP No.22/2013 cannot be taken to its logical conclusion unless and untill the share that is 7/12th share of the petitioner is specifically earmarked and allotted to him. That in the absence of petitioner being added as party, no effective final decree can be drawn. Hence, he submits the order impugned requires to be set aside. Petitioner be permitted to implead as a party-respondent in the pending final decree proceedings. Hence seeks for allowing of the petition. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents who are the petitioners in final decree proceedings does not dispute the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.196/1999 upholding the claim of the petitioner herein to the extent of 7/12th share and same having attained finality and that in terms of the said order petitioner is indeed entitled for his 7/12th share and the reminder of the same has to be apportioned by the respondents. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:10417 WP No. 53505 of 2017 8. In that view of the matter and in the light of the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.484/1982 and O.S.No.196/1999 and in view of submission made by the learned counsel for the parties this Court is of the considered view that petitioner who is held to be having the share, right, title and interest to the extent of 7/12th share in the suit schedule property, is indeed a necessary and proper party to the FDP No.22/2013, inasmuch as his share needs to be earmarked and allotted while allotting the share for the other respondents. 9. Accordingly, the following; ORDER (1) Petition is allowed. (2) Impugned order dated 09.11.2017 passed in FDP No.22/2013 on I.A.No.1 produced at Annexure-G is set aside. Petitioner is permitted to come on record as a party-respondent. (3) The Trial Court shall consider the case of the petitioner herein in the light of the aforesaid facts while drawing up of the final decree proceedings. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:10417 WP No. 53505 of 2017 (4) Since the matter is pending from the year 2013, the Trial Court shall endeavour to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible within an outer limit of six (6) months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. SD/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22