- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8129 WP No. 3348 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3348 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. N.B. ASHOK KUMAR S/O N BHAGAVAN DAS AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS 2. SANKALP A S/O N B ASHOK KUMAR AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS PROPS M/S NANUMAL AND SONS NO 206, CHAMUNDESHWARI TALKIES BUILDING SAYYAJI RAO ROAD MYSURU 570001. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. KRISHNAMOORTHY D.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT LAKSHMAMMA SINCE DEAD BY LRS K .B. NAGENDRA S/O LATE B BORAIAH AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS 2. SMT S C BHARATHI W/O LATE M B VIJAYA KUMAR AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8129 WP No. 3348 of 2024 3. B MANOHARA S/O LATE B BORAIAH AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 4. B HARISHA S/O LATE B BORAIAH AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R1 TO R4 ARE R/AT NO 2772 K G KOPPAL, SARASWATHIPURAM MYSURU-570009. 5. B MEENAKSHI D/O LATE B BORAIAH AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS 6. SMT B VASANTHA D/O LATE B BORAIAH AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R6 & R7 ARE R/AT NO 939 7TH MAIN, NEW KANTHARAJA URS ROAD SARASWATHIPURAM MYSURU 570023. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ABHILASH RAJU.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER IMPUGNED DATED 21/12/2023 IN OS NO. 340/2021 ON IA NO. 10 FILED UNDER ORDER I RULE 10(2) OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE PASSED BY THE LEARNED V ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT MYSURU PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8129 WP No. 3348 of 2024 ORAL ORDER 1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by petitioners-defendants challenging the order dated 21.12.2023 passed by the V Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Mysuru on I.A.No.10 filed by the defendants under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of CPC in O.S.No.340/2021, whereby the Trial Court has dismissed the said application. 2. Plaintiffs have filed the suit for eviction against the defendants-tenants. During the pendency of the suit, the defendants had filed I.A.No.10 under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of CPC seeking to implead Mr.M.J.Theertha Prasad as additional defendant on the ground that he is the co- owner, who has also caused notice. The Trial Court by impugned order has dismissed the said application. Being aggrieved, the present petition is filed. 3. The suit is filed for eviction. In an eviction suit, the question of title or the extent of shares held by the plaintiff cannot be decided and not can be made regarding - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8129 WP No. 3348 of 2024 the subject matter of its determination. The landlord and tenant are the only necessary parties to decide the suit filed for eviction. The impleading applicant, who is sought to be impleaded on the ground that he is a co-owner, is not a necessary or proper party to the suit. The plaintiff being a dominus litis cannot be compelled to implead a third person to the suit. Therefore, the Trial Court has rightly dismissed the application. 4. Viewed from any angle, there is no error or illegality in the order passed by the Trial Court. No good grounds are made out to exercise the supervisory jurisdiction vested under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. In view of dismissal of the writ petition, all pending applications are disposed of. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE DM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34