- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10657 WP No. 115415 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 115415 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: MALLIKARJUN S/O. MAHANTESH KARADI, AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: RETD. SERVICE, R/O. BANAHATTI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOTE-587118. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P. N. HOSAMANE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. YALLAVVA W/O. MAHANTESH KARADI, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. TALLIKERI, TQ: HUNAGUND, NOW AT MANNIKATTI, TQ. & DIST: BAGALKOTE-587118. 2. MANJULA D/O. MAHANTESH KARADI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. TALLIKERI, TQ: HUNAGUND, NOW AT MANNIKATTI, TQ. & DIST: BAGALKOTE-587118. 3. PREMA D/O. MAHANTESH KARADI, AGE: 22 YEARS, R/O. TALLIKERI, TQ. HUNAGUND, NOW AT MANNIKATTI, TQ & DIST: BAGALKOTE-587118. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VISHWANATH HEGDE, ADV. FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 & R3 SERVED) 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 QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 19.09.2019 PASSED BY SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BILAGI IN F.D.P. NO.01/2017 AS PER ANNEXURE-F TO THE WRIT PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10657 WP No. 115415 of 2019 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) This writ petition is filed seeking for following reliefs: “1. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 19.09.2019 passed by Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Bilagi in F.D.P. No.01/2017 as per Annexure-F to the writ petition in the interest of justice. 2. Grant such other relief/s as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Heard. 3. Sri.P.N.Hosamane, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents have initiated FDP proceedings in FDP No.1/2017 and in the said proceedings the petitioner filed a memo indicating that he is entitled to funeral and medical expenses incurred by him on deceased Umadevi by way of 1/4th share or proportionate amount as ordered by this Court in RSA.No.5336/2011. However, the FDP Court has not considered the said memo under the impugned order and posted the matter to 17.10.2019. It is submitted that the petitioner has placed evidence before the trial Court with regard to the expenses incurred by him towards Smt.Umadevi during her last days - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10657 WP No. 115415 of 2019 including the funeral expenses and the FDP Court ought to have taken note of the same and awarded the expenses as directed by this Court in RSA.No.5336/2011. Hence, he seeks to allow the petition by directing the FDP Court to award the expenses incurred by the petitioner. 4. Per contra, Sri.Vishwanath Hegde, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 vehemently opposes the petition and submits that the judgment of this Court in RSA.No.5336/2011 dated 13.09.2012 is without issuing notice to the respondents. The alleged direction is only an observation. It is submitted that, this Court in the aforesaid RSA has upheld the lower appellate Court’s judgment and decree. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to any amount claimed by him. It is submitted that the FDP Court has rightly not adjudicated the alleged claim of the petitioner and it has directed the petitioner to place on record the material to establish the expenses incurred by him. He submits that the present petition is premature and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10657 WP No. 115415 of 2019 respondent No.1 and meticulously perused the material available on record. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions advanced. 6. The pleading and material on record indicate that respondent No.1 has filed suit in O.S.No.74/2006 for relief of partition and separate possession which came to be dismissed. Being aggrieved, the appeal in RA No.75/2009 was filed which came to be allowed, which was upheld in RSA.No.5336/2011. The lower appellate Court held that the petitioner and respondents are entitled to ½ share in the suit schedule property. To execute the said decree, the respondents initiated FDP proceedings in FDP No.1/2017. In the said proceedings, the petitioner filed a memo contending that as per the judgment in RSA No.5336/2011, the petitioner is entitled to the expenses incurred by him on deceased Umadevi with regard to the medical and funeral expenses. The said memo was considered by the trial Court and directed the petitioner to produce the documents to establish his claim. This Court in RSA No.5336/2011 vide judgment dated 13.09.2012 has specifically upheld the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court in RA No.75/2009. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10657 WP No. 115415 of 2019 However, observation is made that the petitioner is entitled to claim expenses incurred by him, “if any, both medical and funeral”. The FDP Court taking note of the said observation of this Court in the aforesaid RSA has rightly directed the petitioner to produce legally acceptable material before it so that the claim of the petitioner with regard to the expenses incurred by him, if any, on Smt.Umadevi with regard to the medical and funeral can be awarded. It is always open for the petitioner to make available the documents, if any, to claim the said expenses and without doing the same, the petitioner has rushed to this Court and filed this petition which in my considered view is premature and the order of the trial Court in FDP No.1/2017 does not call for any interference. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) JUDGE RH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10