- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10795 WP No. 105635 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.105635 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. NIRMALA D/O. LATE GANGAMMA AND GRAND DAUGHER OF LATE MUDDAMMA @ MUDDAVA, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC. HOME MAKER, R/O. 16TH WARD, KUMBARA ONI, KUDLIGI, TQ. KUDLIGI, DIST. VIJAYANGARA-583135. 2. SMT. YANKAMMA D/O. LATE MUDDAMMA @ MUDDAVVA, AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC. HOME MAKER, R/O. 16TH WARD, KUMBARA ONI, KUDLIGI, TQ. KUDLIGI, DIST. VIJAYANGARA-583135. 3. SRI. YANKAPPA S/O. LATE MUDDAMMA @ MUDDAVVA, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC. AGRICUTLURE, R/O. 15TH WARD, KACHETTARA ONI, KUDLIGI, TQ. KUDLIGI, DIST. VIJAYANGARA-583135. 4. SMT. OBAMMA W/O. LATE VEERESH AND DUAGHER IN LAW OF MUDDAMMA @ MUDDAVVA, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC. HOME MAKER, R/O 16TH WARD, KUMBARA ONI, KUDLIGI, TQ. KUDLIGI, Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10795 WP No. 105635 of 2025 DIST. VIJAYANGARA-583135. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. HANUMANTHAREDDY SAHUKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. V. DURUGAPPA CLAIMING TO BE S/O LATE KAVALI OBAPPA, AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, 2. SMT. LAKSHMIDEVI W/O. LATE SOLLAPPA, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC. HOME MAKER, 3. V. MOUNIKA D/O. LATE SOLLAPPA, AGE: 17 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY SENIOR UNCLE BY NAME SRI DURGUAPPA RESPONDENT NO.1 AS GUARDIAN ALL ARE R/O. KUDLIGI TOWN, TQ. KUDLIGI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583135. 4. SRI HANUMANTHAPPA S/O. MUDDAMMA @ MUDDAVVA, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KUDLIGI TOWN, TQ. KUDLIGI, DIST. VIJAYANGARA-583135. …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE ORDER DT 04-06-2025 ON IA NO. 4 IN OS NO. 160/2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUDLIGI, PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-P, AND REJECT THE APPLICATION I.A. NO. 4 DATED 22-10-2021, VIDE - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10795 WP No. 105635 of 2025 ANNEXURE-D.B. SUCH OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION AS DEEMED FIT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE INCLUDING AN ORDER FOR COST MAY KINDLY BE PASSED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: A. A writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ or order or direction quashing the Order dt. 04- 06-2025 on IA No. 4 in OS No. 160/2018 passed by the learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Kudligi, produced as Annexure-P, and reject the application I.A. No. 4 dt. 22-10-2021, vide Annexure-D. B. Such other writ or order or direction as deemed fit under the facts and circumstances of the case including an order for cost may kindly be passed. 2. Notice to respondents is dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed. 3. One Shri Kavali Obappa S/o Kavali Muddama @ Muddavva had filed a suit for partition and separate possession in O.S.No.160/2018. The said Kavali - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10795 WP No. 105635 of 2025 Obappa having expired, respondent Nos.1 to 3 had filed an application to come on record as his legal representatives, with respondent No.1 claiming to be his son, respondent No.2 claiming to be the wife of the deceased son, and respondent No.3 claiming to be the daughter of the deceased son. The said application came to be allowed vide order dated 04.06.2025. It is challenging the same that the petitioners are before this Court. 4. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that, even as per the evidence, which has been placed on record, the mother of respondent No.1 was a Devadasi and that respondent No.1 had been born before the marriage between the said Kavali Obappa and the mother of respondent No.1. On that ground, he submits that the application could not have been allowed since the birth of respondent No.1 and the other deceased brother had occurred prior to the alleged marriage. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10795 WP No. 105635 of 2025 5. Having gone through the impugned order, it is clear that the trial Court has taken into consideration the Voter ID card and the Ration Card, where the name of Kavali Obappa is found mentioned as the father of respondent No.1 and the deceased son. At the stage of consideration of the application under Order XXII Rule 4 of CPC, what is required to be considered is, ex facie, whether they are the legal representatives. The claim, if any, and the rights of the legal representatives would have to be decided in the suit after trial. 6. At the most, the contention of the petitioners is as regards the paternity of respondent No.1 and the deceased son, which could be decided on the basis of evidence led by all the parties. The impleading of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 as legal representatives of deceased Kavali Obappa, therefore, cannot be faulted with. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10795 WP No. 105635 of 2025 7. Reserving the aforesaid liberty, the petition stands disposed of. 8. All contentions regarding the paternity and the claims of the parties are left open. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE AM/- CT:PA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56