- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29028 WP No. 8527 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 8527 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. JAYAMMA W/O LATE PILLEGOUDA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O VAKKALERI VILLAGE AND HOBLI, KOLAR-TALUK AND DISTRICT. 2. SMT. RUKMANIYAMMA D/O LATE PILLEGOUDA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO.797, KARANJIKATTE MAIN ROAD, BHOVI COLONY, KOLAR TOWN. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AMARESH.A.ANGADI., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. LAKSHAMAMMA W/O LATE PILLEGOUDA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, 2. SRI. RAJANNA S/O LATE PILLEGOUDA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, 3. SRI. GOPALKRISHNA S/O LATE PILLEGOUDA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 ARE R/O MALIYAPANAHALLI, VEMAGAL-HOBLI, KOLAR TQ. AND DIST. Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29028 WP No. 8527 of 2024 4. SMT. NARAYANAMMA D/O LATE PILLEGOUDA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, 5. SRI. JAYARAMEGOUDA S/O LATE PILLEGOUDA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 6. SRI. ANAND S/O LATE PILLEGOUDA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESPONDENTS 4 TO 6 ARE R/AT 797, KARANIKATTE MAIN ROAD, BHOVI COLONY, KOLAR TOWN. 7. SRI. SEENAPPA S/O MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O MALIYAPANAHALLI VILLAGE, VEMAGAL-HOBLI, KOLAR-TALUK AND DIST. PIN-583 101. 8. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, BY ITS SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NO.39, BARATHA SCOUTS AND GUIDES BUILDING, SHANTHI HOUSE, 4TH FLOOR, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K.SHIVASHANKAR., ADVOCATE FOR R7; SRI. SHIVARAJ., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.S.N.RAJESH., ADVOCATE FOR R8; R1 & 3 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; NOTICE TO R2, 4, 5 & 6-DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED:29.07.2025) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29028 WP No. 8527 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Counsel for the respective parties have appeared in person. An emergent Notice to the respondents was ordered on 22.03.2024. A perusal of the office note depicts that respondents 1 and 3 are served and unrepresented. They have neither engaged the services of an advocate, nor conducted the case as a party in person. 2. Though the petition is listed today for orders, with the consent of counsel for the respective parties it is heard. 3. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated 07.03.2024 passed by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Kolar in O.S.No.460/2023 vide Annexure-C. 4. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29028 WP No. 8527 of 2024 5. The short point that requires consideration is whether the order of the Trial Court requires interference. 6. Suffice it to note that the petitioners are the plaintiffs and they filed a suit seeking the relief of Partition and Separate Possession claiming 1/7th share in the suit schedule property. During the pendency of the suit, counsel for defendant No.7 filed a memo. The memo reads as under: "The defendant No.7 submits that he has purchased the entire 01 Acre 13 Guntas in old Sy.No.46/1 of Malliyappanahalli, Kolar Taluk under the registered sale deed on 13.08.1997. Now the plaintiffs have filed the above suit claiming 1/7th share in the suit schedule property. The suit schedule property is acquired by the KIADB and its compensation amount is yet to be filed. In the meanwhile, the above suit is filed, claiming alleged 1/7th share in it. Hence, the defendant No.7 is entitled for entire compensation amount as per records, however, out of total compensation amount, 1/7th alleged amount may - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29028 WP No. 8527 of 2024 kindly be ordered to deposit in court and permit the seventh defendant to draw the remaining amount i.e., 6/7th share in it." The plaintiffs and defendant 1 to 6 did not oppose the memo. The Trial Court vide order dated 07.03.2024 allowed the memo and ordered that the share of the plaintiffs shall be deposited in a bank of their choice as fixed deposit for a period of three years initially and to be extended form time to time till the rights of the parties are finally adjudicated and the office was directed to send the authenticated copy of the order to defendant No.8 along with the copy of the memo on the consent of defendant No.7 by affixing his signature on the memo. The plaintiffs have claimed 1/7th share in the suit schedule property. Their rights are yet to be decided in an on- going suit. In my view, the Trial Court has protected the interest of the plaintiffs by making an order to deposit 1/7th share in the Bank as fixed deposit for a period of three years initially and to be extended from time to time. I find no grounds to interfere with the order of the Trial Court. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be rejected. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29028 WP No. 8527 of 2024 7. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is rejected. The disposal of the Writ Petition will not prejudice the rights of the parties to the lis. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17