- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11973 WP No. 100489 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 100489 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SHRI GURUSIDDESHWAR SWAMIGALU, PEETHADUKARIGALU, SHRI GURUDEV BRAMHANAND ASHRAM, SAUNSHI, (SWARNAGIRI), AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: SAINT, R/O. TABAKADAHONALLI, TQ. KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD. R/BY GPA HOLDER SATISH S/O. FAKIRGOUWDA PATIL, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SAUNSHI, TQ: KUNDGOL, DIST: DHARWAD. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASHANT S. HOSMANI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. LINGRAJ S/O. SANKAPPA BANAVANNAVAR, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. TABAKADAHONNALLI, TQ. KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD-581204. 2. SAPNA D/O. SANKAPPA BANAVANNAVAR, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. TABAKADAHONNALLI, TQ. KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD-581204. 3. SHIVAJI S/O. SANKAPPA BANAVANNAVAR, Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11973 WP No. 100489 of 2022 AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. TABAKADAHONNALLI, TQ. KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD-581204. 4. NEELAWWA W/O. SANKAPPA BANAVANNAVAR, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. TABAKADAHONNALLI, TQ. KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD-581204. 5. SANKAPPA S/O. NINGAPPA BANAVANNAVAR, AGE: 71 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. TABAKADAHONNALLI, TQ. KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD-581204. 6. GURU ABHINAV BRAMHANAND MAHASWAMIGALU, S/O. GURU SIDDESHWAR SWAMIGALU, SHRI GURU BRAMHANAND, SHRI GURUDEV ASHRAM, SWARANAGIRI, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: SAINT, R/O. TABAKADAHONNALLI, TQ. KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD-581204. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. P.K. SANNINGAMMANAVAR AND SRI. S. S. HEGDE, ADV. FOR R1 TO R4; SRI. B. S. KAMATE, ADV. FOR R6; NOTICE TO R5 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 AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21/10/2021 PASSED IN OS NO.76/2015 PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KALAGHATAGI PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-H AND ALLOW IA NO.4 FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11973 WP No. 100489 of 2022 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) This petition is filed seeking following reliefs: 1) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari and set aside the order dated 21/10/2021 passed in OS No.76/2015 pending on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC Kalaghatagi produced at Annexure-H and allow IA No.4 filed by the petitioner in the interest of justice and equity. 2) Issue any other writ or directions which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Sri Prashant S.Hosamani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed an application for impleadment in a suit filed by one Lingraj and others against Sankappa, the father of Lingraj and in the said suit, Shri Guru Abhinav Brahmanand Mahaswamigalu, Shri Guru Brahmanand Ashram has been arrayed as a defendant No. 2. It is submitted that the defendant No. 1 in the said suit has sold the property in favour of the Ashram in the year 05.07.2001 and presently the respondent No.6 Shri Guru Abhinav Brahmanand Mahaswamigalu is representing the Ashram. It is submitted that the said Swamiji - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11973 WP No. 100489 of 2022 is not the Pithadhipathi of the Ashram. It is further submitted that the petitioner herein is the Pithadhipathi of defendant No. 2 and he is required to be a party in the said suit to defend the suit in an effective manner. It is further submitted that this Court in number of proceedings made observation that Shri Guru Abhinav Brahmanand Mahaswamigalu is required to seek declaration that he is the Pithadhipathi of the defendant - Ashram and in the absence of such declaration, he cannot be allowed to continue representing the Ashram in the said suit. It is also submitted that it is the apprehension of the petitioner-Swamiji that the plaintiffs, defendant No. 1 and Shri Guru Abhinav Brahmanand Mahaswamigalu may collude with each other and deprived the property of the Ashram of which the petitioner is the pontiff. However, the trial Court has not appreciated these aspects and rejected the application for impleadment. Hence, he seeks to allow the same. 3. Per contra, Sri B.S.Kamate, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6/defendant No.2 supports the impugned order of the trial Court and submits that the suit property is the Ashram property as is evident from the revenue - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11973 WP No. 100489 of 2022 records and Shri Guru Abhinav Brahmanand Mahaswamigalu being the successor of the earlier pontiff has been made a party in the suit and he is effectively defending the suit by filing written statement denying the case of the plaintiffs. It is submitted that the trial Court taking note of all the aspects, has rightly rejected the application, which does not call for any interference and seeks to dismiss the petition. 4. I heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.6 and meticulously perused the material available record. 5. One Sri Lingraj Banavannavar and others filed O.S.No.76/2015 for relief of partition and separate possession against Sankappa Basavannavar and another. In the said suit, Shri Guru Brahmanand Ashram has been arrayed as defendant No. 2 and the said Ashram is represented by Shri Guru Abhinav Brahmanand Mahaswamigalu. In the said suit, the present petitioner filed an application under Order I Rule 10(2) r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’, for short) seeking for impleadment, which came to be rejected by the trial Court under the impugned order. The contention of the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11973 WP No. 100489 of 2022 petitioner is that he is the real Pithadhipathi of Shri Gurudev Brahmananda Ashram and not Shri Guru Abhinav Brahmanand Mahaswamigalu. It is to be noticed that the issue with regard to the rightful successor of the Ashram is required to be decided by the competent court in appropriate proceedings. The records indicate that there is a serious dispute between the present petitioner and Shri Guru Abhinav Brahmanand Mahaswamigalu with regard to the succession to Shri Gurudev Brahmanand Ashram. I am of the considered view that unless the said issue is got resolved in the appropriate proceedings, the petitioner cannot claim himself as a successor of the Shri Gurudev Brahmanand Ashram. The aforesaid observation also will not confer a declaration that Shri Guru Abhinav Brahmanand Mahaswamigalu is declared as a successor of Shri Gurudev Brahmananda Ashram. What is required to be seen is that the suit is for the relief of partition and separate possession filed by the children of Sankappa who has sold the property in favour of defendant No.2-Ashram. The records indicate that suit schedule property standing in the name of Ashram and the said Ashram is effectively represented by Shri Guru Abhinav Brahmanand Mahaswamigalu in the said suit. When things stood thus, the trial - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11973 WP No. 100489 of 2022 Court is right in recording the finding that the suit can be adjudicated in the absence of proposed defendant No.3/petitioner. I do not find any error in the finding recorded by the trial Court calling for interference in the present proceedings. It is made clear that the aforesaid observations of this Court are confined only with relating to adjudication of I.A.No.4 in O.S.No.76 of 2015 and the same shall not be construed as a declaration of status of either the petitioner or the Sri Guru Abhinava Brahmananda Swamigalu. 6. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER Petition is devoid of merit. Accordingly, it is rejected. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) JUDGE CLK /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5