SRI HANAMANTASINGH ALIAS HANAMANTAPPA S/O SHANKARAPPA NANDIHALLI v. SMT LALITABAI ALIAS YELLAWWA W/O LAXMANSINGH JAMADAR
WP/107096/2024 · 2025-03-18
Jyoti Mulimani
Original Suitbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 47398 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 47398 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4940 WP No. 107096 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 107096 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
1. SRI. HANAMANTASINGH @ HANAMANTAPPA S/O SHANKARAPPA NANDIHALLI, AGE: 72 YEARS, OCC: RETD. TEACHER, R/O: NEAR KENCHAMMA TEMPLE, DEVAGIRI, TQ: AND DIST: HAVERI-581 110. 2. SRI. KIRANASINGH S/O HANAMANTSINGH @ HANAMAPPA NANDIHALLI, R/O: NEAR KENCHAMMA TEMPLE, DEVAGIRI, TQ: AND DIST: HAVERI-581 115. NOTE: SINCE PETITIONER NO.1 IS R/BY PETITIONER NO.2 AS G.P.A. HOLDER. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. N.P. VIVEKMEHTA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT. LALITABAI @ YELLAWWA W/O LAXMANSINGH JAMADAR, AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK AND AGRICULTURE, R/O: GUTTAL, NOW RESIDING AT: C/O. LAXMANSINGH S/O SHANKARSINGH JAMADAR, NEAR CHOUDAMMA TEMPLE, SHIVABASAVANAGAR, HOSANAGAR ROAD, HAVERI-581 110. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. VIJAYENDRA BHIMAKKANAVAR., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4940 WP No. 107096 of 2024
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
Sri.N.P.Vivekmehta., counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Vijayendra Bhimakkanavar., counsel for the respondent have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated:22.10.2024 passed by the Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Haveri in O.S.No.231/2018 vide Annexure-D and allow the I.A.No.9 under order 16 Rule 6 r/w. 151 of CPC vide Annexure-D.
3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 4. Suffice it to note that the plaintiff filed a suit for partition and separate possession of her ½ share in the suit schedule property after the death of her mother Smt.Savantravva. After service of notice, the defendants appeared through their counsel and filed the written statement. - 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4940 WP No. 107096 of 2024
During the pendency of the suit, the defendants moved an application under order 16 Rule 6 read with Section 151 of CPC in I.A.No.9 for summoning the documents from the President, Panchayat Development Officer. The plaintiff submitted that they have no objection to allow the application. Despite the same the Trial Court erroneously rejected the application.
This is unsustainable in law. The reason is simple. When the plaintiff has no objection to allow the application filed by the defendants, there was no impediment to the Trial Court to allow the application. The Trial Court has failed to have regard to the relevant considerations and disregarded relevant matters. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the Trial Court order. 5. The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The order dated:22.10.2024 passed by the Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Haveri in O.S.No.231/2018 vide Annexure-D is quashed. 6. Resultantly, the Writ petition is allowed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP LIST NO.: 3 SL NO.: 24