- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11053 WP No. 115359 of 2019 C/W WP No. 115368 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 115359 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) C/W. WRIT PETITION NO. 115368 OF 2019 IN WP NO. NO. 115359 OF 2019 BETWEEN: SRI. RAMESH S/O. JAKAPPA PATIL, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. H.NO.108, PATIL GALLI, CHALAWENHATTI, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI-590015. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASAD RAMESHRAO SIDHANTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. REKHA W/O. SADA NERLI, BEFORE MARRIAGE REKHA D/O. NARASU KUDNURKAR, AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: 1272, MARATHA GALLI, SIDDAPURWADI, TQ: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591213. 2. SRI. NARASU @ NARSING S/O. APPAJI KUDNURKAR, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: SAMBAJI GALLI, KURIHAL-591143, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. SMT. TULASABAI W/O. SUBHASH KUDNURKAR, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: SAMBAJI GALLI, KURIHAL, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI-591143. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11053 WP No. 115359 of 2019 C/W WP No. 115368 of 2019 4. SRI. SURAJ S/O. SUBHASH KUDNURKAR, AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SAMBAJI GALLI, KURIHAL, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI-591143. 5. MISS. TEJESWANI D/O. SUBHASH KUDNURKAR, AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: SAMBAJI GALLI, KURIHAL, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI-591143. 6. MISS. POONAM D/O. NARASU KUDNURKAR, AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SAMBAJI GALLI, KURIHAL, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI-591143. 7. SRI. PRASHANT S/O. NARASU KUDNURKAR, AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SAMBAJI GALLI, KURIHAL, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI-591143. 8. MISS. PRIYANKA D/O. NARASU KUDNURKAR, AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. SAMBAJI GALLI, KURIHAL, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI-591143. NOTE: SINCE THE PRESENT RESPONDENT NO.8 IS A MINOR, SHE IS REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER I.E., PRESENT RESPONDENT NO.2. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. CHETAN MUNNOLI, ADV. FOR R1; SRI. SANGRAM S. KULKARNI, ADV. FOR R2, R4, R6 & R7; NOTICE TO R3 & R5 SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.12.2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BELAGAVI AT: BELAGAVI IN O.S.NO.879/2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-'E' DISMISSING THE I.A.NO.II FILED BY THE PRESENT PETITIONER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11053 WP No. 115359 of 2019 C/W WP No. 115368 of 2019 IN WP NO. NO. 115368 OF 2019 BETWEEN: SRI. RAMESH S/O JAKAPPA PATIL, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. H.NO.108, PATIL GALLI, CHALAWENHATTI, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI-590012. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASAD RAMESHRAO SIDHANTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. NARASU @ NARSING S/O. APPAJI KUDNURKAR, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. LAXMIGALLI, KURIHAL K.H., TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI-591143. 2. SMT. REKHA W/O. SADA NERLI, (BEFORE MARRIAGE REKHA D/O. NARASU KUDNURKAR, AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. 1272, MARATHA GALLI, SIDDAPURWADI, TQ: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591213. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SANGRAM S. KULKARNI, ADV. FOR R1; SRI. CHETAN MUNNOLI, ADV. FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.07.2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED VI ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, BELAGAVI AT BELAGAVI IN O.S.NO.690/2017 VIDE ANNEXURE 'G' ALLOWING THE IA NO. 3 FILED BY THE PRESENT RESPONDENT NO.2, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11053 WP No. 115359 of 2019 C/W WP No. 115368 of 2019 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) These petitions are filed seeking following reliefs: In W.P.No.115359/2019: A) Quash the impugned order dated 13.12.2018 passed by the learned Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Belagavi at Belagavi in O.S.No.879/2017 vide Annexure-'E' dismissing the I.A.No.II filed by the present petitioner, in the interest of justice and equity. B) Pass such order or orders which this Hon’ble court deem fit and necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case. In W.P.No.115368/2019 A) Quash the impugned order dated 10.07.2019 passed by the learned VI Addl. Civil Judge, Belagavi at Belagavi in O.S.No.690/2017 vide Annexure 'G' allowing the IA No. 3 filed by the present respondent no.2, in the interest of justice and equity. B) Pass such order or orders which this Hon’ble court deem fit and necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11053 WP No. 115359 of 2019 C/W WP No. 115368 of 2019 2. Heard Sri Prasad Rameshrao Sidhanti, Sri Sangram S.Kulkarni and Sri Chetan Munnoli, learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.115368/2019 submits that the petitioner has filed O.S.No.690/2017 for a relief of specific performance of the contract against one Narasu. In the said suit, the daughter of said Narasu filed an application for impleadment which came to be allowed by the trial Court contrary to the settled principles of law. It is submitted that the suit filed by the petitioner is earlier in point and later Smt.Rekha who has been impleaded in the suit filed by Sri Ramesh Patil has also filed O.S.No.879/2017 for relief of partition and separate possession and in the said suit, the present petitioner – Sri Ramesh Patil filed an application for impleadment which came to be rejected. It is contended that both the suits are tried in different courts and if Smt.Rekha can be necessary party in a suit for specific performance filed by petitioner – Sri Ramesh Patil, then the agreement holder Sri Ramesh Patil would have been impleaded in a suit filed by Smt.Rekha for partition as is anticipated right under the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11053 WP No. 115359 of 2019 C/W WP No. 115368 of 2019 agreement would be affected, if he is not arrayed as a party in O.S.No.879/2017. Hence, he seeks to allow the application filed by the petitioner – Sri Ramesh Patil for impleadment in O.S.No.879/2017. 4. Per contra, Sri Sangram S.Kulkarni and Sri Chetan Munnoli, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submit that O.S.No.690/2017 is for relief of specific performance. In the said suit, the daughter of Narasu who has executed the agreement in favour of the petitioner – Sri Ramesh Patil was impleaded on the ground that she is a co-parcener of the joint family property. In support of their contention, Sri Sangram S.Kulkarni, learned counsel placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Moreshar Yadaorao Mahajan v. Vyankatesh Sitaram Bhedi (D) through LRs and others reported in 2022 SCC On-Line SC 1307 and submits that insofar as suit for partition filed by Smt.Rekha is concerned, the agreement holder is neither necessary nor proper party to the suit. Hence, they seek to dismiss the writ petitions. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondents and meticulously perused the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11053 WP No. 115359 of 2019 C/W WP No. 115368 of 2019 material available on record. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions advanced. 6. Sri Ramesh Patil filed O.S.No.690/2017 for relief of specific performance of agreement dated 10.07.2001 and 17.10.2001 alleged to have been executed by one Sri Narasu. In the said suit, the daughter of Narasu, Smt.Rekha filed an application under Order I Rule 10(2) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for impleadment which came to be allowed. Smt.Rekha filed O.S.No.879/2017 against her father Narasu and others for a relief of partition and separate possession of her share claiming to be co-parcener of the family. In the said suit, the agreement holder Sri Ramesh Patil filed an application for impleadment under Order I Rule 10(2) of CPC which came to be rejected on the ground that the suit is for partition and separate possession and stranger to the family cannot be impleaded as he is neither necessary nor proper party to the suit. Admittedly, O.S.No.690/2017 is filed prior to O.S.No.879/2017 and the parties are claiming their respective rights in the suits. Sri Ramesh Patil intends to enforce the agreement of sale with regard to one property and Smt.Rekha is seeking her share in - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11053 WP No. 115359 of 2019 C/W WP No. 115368 of 2019 five properties. Learned counsel appearing for the parties in principle agree that if both the suits are tried together, the interest of justice would be met and no prejudice would cause to the other side. Keeping in mind the principle that if both the suits are allowed to be tried separately, the interest of the parties to the suit may affect by divergent findings and judgments. Hence, in my considered view without expressing any opinion and without interfering with the impugned orders in both the writ petitions, I am of the considered view that both the suits in O.S.No.690/2017 pending on the file of VI Addl. Civil Judge, Belagavi and O.S.No.879/2017 pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Belagavi are tried together. 7. In view of the consensus arrived by the learned counsel, this Court need not adjudicate the legal contentions urged in these petitions and they are kept open to be decided at an appropriate stage. 8. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petitions are disposed off. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11053 WP No. 115359 of 2019 C/W WP No. 115368 of 2019 ii. O.S.No.690/2017 is transferred to the Court of Principal Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Belagavi. iii. The Principal Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Belagavi shall club O.S.No.690/2017 with O.S.No.879/2017 and try both suits together. iv. No order as to costs. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) JUDGE CLK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1