- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1566 WP No. 100489 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 100489 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SHRI GAJENDRA @ GAJENDRANATH S/O. GURAPPA AGASIMANI, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BAZAAR ROAD, HIREBAGEWADI, TQ: & DIST: BELAGAVI-591109. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANTOSH B. RAWOOT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. VIDYA W/O. VITTAPPA HOSAMANI, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KALLUR, POST: UPPIN-BETAGERI, TQ:& DIST: DHARWAD-581206. 2. SHRI RAVINDRANATH S/O. GURAPPA AGASMANI, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: GOVT. SERVICE, R/O. PLOT NO.69, SY.NO.227/D, ”SHIVALINGESHAR COLONY”, SARATHI NAGAR, VTC BELAGAVI, DOORDARSHAN NAGAR, TQ: & DIST: BELAGAVI-591108. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.G. INDI AND SRI. S.S. BETURMATH, ADVOCATES FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION, SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 17/12/2024 PASSED ON I.A. NO. I IN O.S. NO.301/2024 BY THE IV ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BELAGAVI VIDE ANNEXURE-T BY ALLOWING APPLICATION AS PRAYER FOR, INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.01.29 11:59:22 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1566 WP No. 100489 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. Respondent No.1 is on caveat. Notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed. 2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ or direction, setting aside the Order dated 17/12/2024 passed on I.A. No. I in o.s. No.301/2024 by the IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Belagavi vide Annexure-T by allowing application as prayer for, interest of justice and equity. b) Pass any such appropriate orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit, just and proper in the circumstances of this case, in the ends of justice and equity. 3. The brief facts of the case are; 3.1. The petitioner has filed an application under Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure in O.S.No.301/2024, filed by the petitioner seeking for declaration and consequent relief of permanent injunction, for stay of FDP - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1566 WP No. 100489 of 2025 proceedings in FDP No.6/2023, which came to be dismissed vide the impugned order dated 17.12.2025, which is challenged in the present proceedings. 3.2. A suit in O.S.No.182/2018, had been filed before the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Belagavi, by respondent No.1 herein, seeking for partition and separate possession, which came to be decreed. 3.3. Challenging the same, the petitioner herein had filed RFA No.100275/2020, wherein it was declared that the first and second defendants are having 1/3rd undivided share in the total extent of the properties and a preliminary decree was directed to be drawn up. 3.4. The same came to be challenged in Writ Petition No. 6587/2023, which came to be dismissed. Subsequently, FDP No.6/2023 was filed. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1566 WP No. 100489 of 2025 3.5. During the pendency of the said FDP proceedings, the mother of the petitioner, namely Mahadevi Gurappa Agashimani, had executed a relinquishment deed in favor of respondent No.1, who was respondent No.2 in the FDP proceedings. 3.6. The petitioner, alleging that the relinquishment deed was obtained by fraud, had filed a private complaint and also a suit in O.S.No.301/2024 seeking for a declaration that the relinquishment deed was not binding. 3.7. In the said suit, the aforesaid application had been filed seeking for stay of FDP No.6/2023, which came to be rejected by the Court seized of O.S.No.301/2024. 4. The submission of Sri.Santosh B. Rawoot, learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the relinquishment deed was executed on 30.09.2022. He claims that, his mother was unwell at the time and, as such, the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1566 WP No. 100489 of 2025 execution of the relinquishment deed was fraudulent, depriving the petitioner of his rightful share. In this background, he submits that, until O.S.No.301/2024 is decided, the further proceedings in FDP No.6/2023 ought to have been stayed. 5. Having gone through the documents produced and after perusing the impugned order, it is clearly seen that O.S.No.182/2018 had been contested by the petitioner all the way up to the Hon'ble Apex Court, where the petitioner had failed. The Special Leave Petition having been dismissed on 25.05.2023, in the meanwhile, the mother of the petitioner expired on 15.12.2022, after which O.S.No.301/2024 has been filed, challenging the relinquishment deed executed by the mother during her lifetime on 30.09.2022, on the ground that the same came to the knowledge of the petitioner post disposal of the Special Leave Petition. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1566 WP No. 100489 of 2025 6. Having perused the documents, it is seen that the petitioner having failed in the SLP, has subsequently filed O.S.No.301/2024. The relinquishment deed was is a registered document executed by his mother. Now, the FDP proceedings are sought to be stayed by the petitioner till the disposal of O.S.No.301/2024, which in my considered opinion, is only to protract the proceedings and delay the implementation of the final decree. 7. The Trial Court is also seized of O.S.No.301/2024, and after considering the records in O.S.No.301/2024, has also categorically came to the conclusion that no there are no grounds made out by the petitioner to stay the proceedings in FDP No.6/2023. I do not find any infirmity in the said order. 8. For the reasons stated by the Trial Court, as also for the reasons given hereinabove, the FDP Court would - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1566 WP No. 100489 of 2025 have to go ahead with the FDP No.6/2023 and conclude the proceedings at the earliest. 9. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE gab CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49