- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48532 WP No. 28102 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 28102 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: H.S. JAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS S/O LATE SIDDAPPA R/O HULIPINAKATTE VILLAGE ANAGODU HOBLI DAVANAGERE TALUK & DISTRICT - 577 556. &PETITIONER (BY SRI CHIDAMBARA G.S, ADV.) AND: 1. K.B. PRAKASH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS S/O LATE BASAVALINGAPPA R/O KURKI VILLAGE DAVANGERE - 577 514. 2. SUBHADRAMMA AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS W/O LATE BASAVALINGAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LRs RESPONDENTS 3, 5, 6, 4(a) & 4(b). 3. MARULASIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O LATE BASAVALINGAPPA. 4. RAVINDRAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS S/O LATE BASAVALINGAPPA Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48532 WP No. 28102 of 2019 R-4a SMT. RENUKA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS W/O LATE RAVINDRAKUMAR. R-4b YATHISH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS S/O LATE RAVINDRAKUMAR. BOTH ARE R/O KURKI VILLAGE AND POST DAVANAGAERE TALUK & DISTRICT PIN CODE - 577 514. 5. AJJAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS S/O LATE BASAVALINGAPPA. 6. SURESH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS S/O LATE BASAVALINGAPPA. RESPONDENTS 2 TO 6 ARE R/O KURKI VILLAGE DAVANGERE TALUK - 577 514. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MANJUNATHA P.V, ADV., R-1; R-3, R-5 & R-6, R-4(A & B) TREATED AS LRs OF R-2, V/O DTD: 23.06.2025; R-5, R-6, R-4 (A) R-4(B) & R-3 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 13.06.2019, VIDE ANNEXURE-A, PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER VI MACT, DAVANAGAERE IN O.S.NO.162/2017 ON IA NO.12 AND PASS APPROPRIATE CONSEQUENTIAL ORDERS ALLOWING THE SAID APPLICATION AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48532 WP No. 28102 of 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. This writ petition is filed with a prayer to set aside the order dated 13.06.2019 passed on IA.no.12 in O.S.No.162/2017 by the Court of II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Davanagere. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 3. Suit in O.S.No.162/2017 is filed by respondent no.1 herein before the jurisdictional Civil Court seeking the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. The contesting defendants have entered appearance in the suit and filed their written statement. IA-12 was filed on behalf of the petitioner under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC with a prayer to implead him as party defendant to the suit in O.S.No.162/2017. The said application was opposed by the plaintiff. The Trial Court vide the order impugned, has rejected the said application and being aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48532 WP No. 28102 of 2019 4. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that O.S.No.162/2017 is filed by respondent no.1 herein seeking partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. Defendants are the wife and children of late Basavalingappa, and plaintiff is one of the sons of late Basavalingappa. Petitioner herein has filed IA-12 in O.S.No.162/2017 to implead him as party defendant no.6 in the said suit. 5. According to the petitioner, the plaintiff in O.S.No.162/2017 has executed an agreement for sale on 05.02.2010 in respect of Item no.2 of the suit schedule property in O.S.No.162/2017 after having received valid consideration for the same. 6. The material on record would go to show that the petitioner has filed O.S.No.445/2018 before the jurisdictional Civil court seeking the relief of specific performance of the aforesaid agreement and plaintiff in O.S.No.162/2017 is party defendant in the said suit. 7. While considering the application filed for impleadment, it is necessary to consider whether the proposed party is a - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48532 WP No. 28102 of 2019 necessary or proper party to the suit. A necessary party is a party who is essential for the purpose of disposal of the suit and a proper party is a party whose presence would be required for the purpose of effectively adjudicating the dispute involved in the suit. 8. In the present case, petitioner claims that he has entered into an agreement for sale in respect of Item no.2 of the suit schedule properties with the parties to the suit in O.S.No.162/2017. If that is so, in order to protect the interest of the petitioner in Item no.2 of the suit schedule property, his application ought to have been entertained by the Trial Court since he is a necessary party to the suit. In addition to the same, petitioner has also filed separate suit in O.S.No.445/2018 seeking specific performance of the agreement dated 05.02.2010 alleged to have been executed by the parties in O.S.No.162/2017 in his favour, in respect of one of the items of the suit schedule properties in O.S.No.162/2017. Therefore, the Trial Court was not justified in rejecting the petitioner's application filed under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC. Accordingly, the following order: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48532 WP No. 28102 of 2019 9. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 13.06.2019 passed on IA.no.12 in O.S.No.162/2017 by the Court of II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Davanagere, is set aside. Consequentially, the prayer made in IA-12 is granted. 10. It is needless to state that since the suit is of the year 2017, the Trial Court shall expedite the trial in the suit and dispose of the same at the earliest. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KK