- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21958 W.P. No.46252/2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.46252/2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. T. ROOPA W/O LATE GOPALA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS NO.78/2, BOMMANAHALLI BEGUR ROAD, BANGALORE-560 068. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.R. SREEPRASAD, ADV.,) AND: 1 SRI. ASHWATHNARAYANASWAMY S/O LATE THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. 2. SRI. T. GOVINDARAJU S/O LATE THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. 3. SRI. T. ASHOKKUMAR S/O LATE THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS. 4. SMT. PARVATHAMMA W/O LATE SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. 5. SRI. AMAR S/O LATE SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS. ALL ARE R/AT APPEGOWDANAHALLI GATE THOTADA MANEGALU, KASABA HOBLI Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: High Court of karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21958 W.P. No.46252/2019 SIDLAGHATTA TALUK CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-561204. 6. SMT. AMBIKA W/O PRAKASH D/O LATE SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS VAPASANDRA CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK AND DISTRICT-561204. 7. SMT. MALA W/O ANJIREDDY D/O LATE SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS SANTHEKALLAHALLI VILLAGE KAIWARA HOBLI CHINTAMANI TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT-571115. 8. SMT. VINUTHA W/O RAGHAVENDRA D/O LATE SRINIVAS KESHAVAPURA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, SIDLAGHATTA TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-561204. 9. SMT. VIJAYALAKSHMI W/O RAMU AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS APPEGOWDANAHALLI VILLAGE THOTADA MANEGALU KASBA HOBLI SIDLAGHATTA TALUK-561105. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.V. PRAKASH, ADV., FOR R9 R1 TO R4, R6 & R8 ARE SERVED V/O/DTD:27.09.2024 NOTICE TO R5 IS D/W) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING ORDERS DATED 7.8.2019 PASSED ON IAs 1 TO 4 BY THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SIDLAGHATTA IN O.S.22/2016 PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND B & ETC. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21958 W.P. No.46252/2019 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, 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: "(a) Issue a writ of Certiorari quashing orders dated 07.08.2019 passed on IAs 1 to 4 by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Sidlaghatta in OS 22/2016 produced vide ANNEXURE-A and B (b) Grant such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court deems fit under the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity" 2. Sri.S.R.Sreeprasad, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is sole legal heir of the original plaintiff Sri.T.Gopal, who has filed OS.No.22/2016 seeking for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. After the death of original plaintiff, the petitioner filed an application to come on record as legal representative which came to be dismissed by the trial Court without assigning any proper reason solely on the ground that the respondents have denied the petitioner's claim of being the wife of deceased - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21958 W.P. No.46252/2019 Sri.T.Gopal as he died unmarried. It is submitted that the trial Court ought to have conducted an enquiry as contemplated under Order 22 Rule 5 of the CPC and without doing so, and ignoring the documents produced by the petitioner, the trial Court proceeded to reject the application. Hence, he seeks to set aside the impugned order by allowing the writ petition and to direct the trial Court to hold an enquiry, if the other side disputes that the petitioner is the legal representative of the deceased Sri.T.Gopal. 3. Per contra, Sri.K.V.Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.9 supports the order of the trial Court and submits that the suit filed by the petitioner in O.S.37/2016 for partition and separate possession is much prior to the death of original plaintiff, which is withdrawn on 03.09.2016. No material is placed on record to show that the petitioner is the wife of late Sri.T.Gopal. Hence, trial Court has rightly rejected the said application and he seeks to dismiss the petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21958 W.P. No.46252/2019 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the respondents and meticulously perused the material available on record. 5. The material available on record indicates that O.S.22/2016 was filed by one Sri.T.Gopal, son of late Sri.Thimmaiah seeking the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. The petitioner herein has filed an application under Order 22 Rule 1 and 3 r/w Section 151 of the CPC to come on record as the legal representative of the deceased plaintiff. It is averred in the application that the plaintiff has died on 03.02.2016 and that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the plaintiff and the sole legal representative of the deceased. However, the trial Court considering the objections of the respondents, dismissed the application on the ground that the petitioner is not the wife of the plaintiff. In my considered view, the trial Court has committed a grave error, as the petitioner has produced her voter ID as at - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21958 W.P. No.46252/2019 Annexure-L, which indicates the name of her husband as Sri.Gopal T. It is also submitted that other documents were also produced before the trial Court. That being so, I am of the considered view that the trial Court has committed a grave error in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner. The respondents disputed that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of Sri.T.Gopal. When things stood thus, the trial Court is required to determine the question with regard to the legal representatives as provided under Order 22 Rule 5 of the CPC by holding enquiry and without doing so, the trial Court has proceeded to reject the said application. Hence, for the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) Writ petition is allowed in part. ii) The impugned order dated 07.08.2019 on IA.No.1 in O.S.No.22/2016 by the Additional Civil Judge & JMFC , Sidlaghatta is hereby set aside. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21958 W.P. No.46252/2019 iii) The trial Court is directed to re- consider I.A.No.1 filed by the petitioner under Order 22 Rule 1 and 3 r/w Section 151 of CPC in accordance with law, if need arise, by conducting an enquiry as provided under Order 22 Rule 5 of CPC. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39