- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13184 WP No. 13330 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT PETITION NO. 13330 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. VENKATESHA S/O LATE SRI. KAVERAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 13 8th MAIN ROAD, 2nd CROSS, BYRASANDRA JAYANAGAR EAST 1st BLOCK, BANGALORE 560 011 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GIRI K.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. INJULAMMA ALIAS INJULA W/O SRI. VENKATASWAMY AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 11 NEW GURUPANAPALAYA, 4th MAIN, 9 D CROSS, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 029 2. SMT. SEETHAMMA W/O LATE SRI. KAVERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 13 8th MAIN ROAD, 2 CROSS, BYRASANDRA JAYANAGAR EAST, 1st B BLOCK, BANGALORE 560011 3. SRI. ANANTH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, S/O LATE K RAMAIAH Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13184 WP No. 13330 of 2024 H NO. 15, SOUTH END ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI BANGALORE 560004 4. SRI. KRISHNA S/O LATE K RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, H.NO. 3435, WILSON GARDEN (SITUATED INSIDE MARKET) BANGALORE 27 5. SMT. PUTTAMMA W/O KODANDARAM, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, H.NO.20/10, 2d CROSS, BYRASANDRA EAST JAYANAGAR I BLOCK, BANGALORE 11 6. SMT. VARALAKSHMI ALIAS GOWRI W/O SAKAPPA GURUMURTHY AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT B NARAYANAPURA, CHURCH ROAD, C SAKAMMA LAYOUT, MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE 560 016 7. SMT. SHANTHAMMA W/O LATE K RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, H.NO.55, 5tH MAIN ROAD, BYRASANDRA JAYANAGAR I BLOCK, EAST BANGALORE 560 011 8. SRI. CHANDRA S/O LATE K RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, H.NO. 55 4th MAIN ROAD, BYRASANDRA JAYANAGAR I BLOCK, EAST BANGALORE 560 011 9. SRI. BABU S/O LATE K RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13184 WP No. 13330 of 2024 H.NO. 55 4th MAIN ROAD, BYRASANDRA JAYANAGAR I BLOCK, EAST BANGALORE 560 011 10. SRI. K GUNDAIAH S/O LATE SRI. KAVERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 13, 8 MAIN ROAD, 2nd CROSS, BYRASANDRA JAYANAGAR EAST 1st BLOCK, BANGALORE 560 011 11. SRI. K BALARAJU S/O LATE SRI. KAVERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 13, 8 MAIN ROAD, 2nd CROSS, BYRASANDRA JAYANAGAR EAST 1st BLOCK, BANGALORE 560 011 12. SMT. SHANTHAMMA W/O SRI. KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 1710 14th MAIN ROAD, 31st CROSS, BANASHANKARI 2nd STAGE, BANGALORE 560 070 13. KUMARI ASHA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 14. KUMARI LAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, 15. KUMARI BHARATHI AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, 16. SRI. RAJA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, 17. SRI. LAKSHMATAH HUSBAND OF SMT. INDIRAMMA ALL ARE R/AT NO. 26 BYRASANDRA 2nd CROSS, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13184 WP No. 13330 of 2024 JAYANAGAR I BLOCK EAST BANGALORE 560 011 18. SMT. SHAKUNTHALAMMA W/O SRI. VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.42 PUTTAIAH PALAYA JAYANAGAR 9th BLOCK, BANGALORE 560 069 19. SMT. BHAGYAMMA W/O SRI. MUNIRAJU, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.109 5th CROSS, BYRASANDRA JAYANAGAR 1TH BLOCK, EAST BANGALORE 560 011 20. SMT. KAMAKSHI W/O LATE SRI. R NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.13 8tH MAIN ROAD, 2nd CROSS, BYRASANDRA JAYANAGAR EAST I BLOCK, BANGALORE 560 011 21. SMT. MUNIRATHNAMMA W/O LATE SRI. PAPANNA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT C/O SMT. DHANALAKSHMI AT NO.8, SIDDAGUNTAPALYA, 1st MAIN ROAD, 1st CROSS, BANGALORE 560 029 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BHASKAR BABU H J., ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED IA NO. 3/2023 FILED UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC IN FDP NO. 3/2007 DTD 06.03.2024 BY THE XV ADDL CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE (CCH3) BENGALURU AT ANNX-A AND ETC. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:13184 WP No. 13330 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed by respondent No.4 in FDP.No.3/2007 calling in question the order dated 06.03.2024 whereunder IA.No.3/2023 is filed by respondent No.4 in FDP.No.3/2007 has been rejected. 2. The relevant facts are that respondent No.1 instituted a suit in OS.No.4111/1987 which was decreed on 23.11.2006. FDP.No.3/2007 was filed by respondent No.1 to draw final decree in terms of the decree passed in the suit. IA.No.4/2022 was filed by respondent No.1/ petitioner to permitted her to purchase shares of other shareholders as per the market value. Vide order dated 21.09.2022 the Trial Court allowed the said application, permitted respondent No.1/petitioner to purchase the shares of the other shareholders as per the market value and further ordered that in the event respondent No.1/petitioner fails to purchase the shares as per IA.No.4, the property be sold through public sale and the sale proceeds distributed amongst the shareholders in - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:13184 WP No. 13330 of 2024 terms of the decree dated 31.03.2004 passed in OS.No.4111/1987. Thereafter, the petitioner herein who is respondent No.4 in the final decree proceedings filed IA.No.3/2023. The Trial Court vide order dated 06.03.2024 dismissed the said application. Being aggrieved the present writ petition is filed. 3. It is the vehement contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner/respondent No.4 is in possession of portion of property and she is entitled to seek to purchase the shares of the other shareholders of the property in which she is in possession. 4. It is relevant to note that the application filed by the petitioner/respondent No.1 in IA.No.4/2022 to permit her to purchase the shares of the other shareholders has been allowed by the Trial Court vide order dated 21.09.2022. When respondent No.1 / petitioner has filed IA.No.4/2022, petitioner/ respondent No.4 did not file any objection to the said application. Subsequently, the order dated 21.09.2022 passed on IA.No.4/2022 was called in question by the other - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:13184 WP No. 13330 of 2024 respondents in WP.No.235015/2022. The said order dated 21.09.2022 was not challenged by petitioner/respondent No.4. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1/ petitioner that consequent to the order dated 21.09.2022 respondent No.1/ petitioner has already deposited the value according to the value of the property offered by her before the Trial Court. 6. The Trial Court has rightly noticed that IA.No.4/2022 was not objected to by respondent No.4 nor was the order dated 21.09.2022 allowing IA.No.4/2022 challenged by respondent No.4, the question of favorably considering IA.No.3/2023 filed by respondent No.4 does not arise. The petitioner has failed in demonstrating that the order dated 06.03.2024 passed by the Trial Court is any manner erroneous and liable to be interfered with by this Court in the present writ petition. 7. In the event respondent No.1/petitioner fails to purchase the property in terms of the order dated 21.09.2022 passed on IA.No.4/2022, it is open for the petitioner herein to seek for enforcement of his rights, in accordance with law. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:13184 WP No. 13330 of 2024 8. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE PNV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14