- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23625 WP No. 10370 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 10370 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. GOVINDA S/O LATE NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT MANCHANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE VIA POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DIST. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.R. HIREMATHAD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. JAYAMMA W/O BYATA VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 2. SRI. NAGARAJU M. B. S/O LATE BYATA VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 3. SMT. LAKSHMIDEVI, D/O LATE BYATA VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT CHOLANAYAKANAHALLI, TAVAREKERE HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK. 4. SMT. YASHAASWINI H. W/O M. B. NAGARAJ, Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23625 WP No. 10370 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.1, 2 AND 4 R/AT MANCHANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, VIA. POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT. 5. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA, W/O LATE APPANNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/AT NO. 150, 6TH CROSS, INDIRANAGARA, BIDADI TOWN AND POST, RAMANAGARA TQ AND DIST. 6. SRI. VANKATRAMANAPPA S/O LATE NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, 7. SMT. MANJULA W/O VENKATARAMANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.6 AND 7 R/AT MANCHANAYAKANAHALLI, VILLAGE, VIA. POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TQ AND DIST., 8. SRI. VENKATESH S/O LATE NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT MANCHANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, VIA. POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TQ AND DIST., 9. SMT. MANGAMMA W/O SHIVARUDRAIAH, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23625 WP No. 10370 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS. R/AT NO.53, BILLAKEMPANAHALLI VILLAGE MANCHANAYAKANAHALLI POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TQ AND DIST. 10. SMT. JAYALAKSHMI W/O LATE THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, 11. KUM. NIVEDITHA D/O LATE. THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, 12. MASTER GNANESH S/O LATE THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.10 TO 12 R/AT MANCHANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, VIA. POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TQ AND DIST., 13. SMT. GOWRAMMA W/O RAMALINGAIAH AGED 47 YEARS, R/AT MANCHANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, VIA. POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TQ AND DIST., 14. SMT. HEMAVATHI W/O LATE YATHISH N., AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23625 WP No. 10370 of 2025 15. KUM. BRUNDA SHREE, D/O LATE YATHISH N., AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, (SINCE MINOR, REP. BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. HEMAVATHI) R/AT MANCHANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, VIA. POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TQ AND DIST., SRI. YATHIRAJ N S/O LATE NAGAPPA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS. 16. SMT. MAMATHA W/O LATE YATHIRAJ N AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT MANCHANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, VIA. POST, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TQ AND DIST., …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.V. SHYAME GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R4, R6 TO R10, R13 AND R14; R2, R5, R11, R12, R15 AND R16 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN M.A.NO. 12/2024 DATED 07.03.25 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAMANAGARA IN ANNX-J AND ETC., - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23625 WP No. 10370 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is the plaintiff is before this Court calling in question an order of the First Appellate Court, which vacates the status-quo order that had been granted by the trial Court answering an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('the CPC' for short). The suit in the subject O.S. i.e., O.S.No.269/2021 is filed seeking partition of the property. 2. Heard Shri M.R. Hiremathad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri H.V. Shyame Gowda, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.1, 4, 6 to 10, 13 and 14. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in an earlier suit which was for partition, the petitioner - plaintiff was not a party to the proceedings. The suit is pending before the concerned Court. The issue that has - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23625 WP No. 10370 of 2025 driven the petitioner to this Court is the vacation of the status- quo order that is passed by the trial Court at the hands of the First Appellate Court. This Court has granted an interim order, as was granted by the trial Court. The issue now is the continuance of the interim order and the direction to the concerned Court to conclude the proceedings within a time frame. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that earlier suit in O.S.No.151/1988 was instituted for seeking partition. The suit comes to be dismissed on 02.07.2025, but due to the right of the petitioner - plaintiff not taken note of then, the plaintiff is said to have instituted another suit, i.e., the subject suit. 5. In the light of the aforesaid circumstances and the parties litigating for the last 35 years, I deem it appropriate to direct the concerned Court to conclude the proceedings, within an outer limit of six months, if not earlier. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23625 WP No. 10370 of 2025 6. The interim order that is subsisting would continue subject to further orders passed by the Court on applications so filed by the parties. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not pronounced anything on the merit of the matter. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE JY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44 CT: BHK