- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50306 CRP No. 613 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.613 OF 2025 (IO) BETWEEN: 1. SMT S LAKSHMIDEVI D/O LATE SHIVARAM AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT NO.822, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS, BEHIND GOVERNMENT COLLEGE SRS ROAD, PEENYA BENGALURU NORTH PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES BENGALURU-560058 2. SMT. S VIDYA D/O LATE SHIVARAM W/O VISHWANATH GOWDA S.C. AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT NO.40/12-6, 22ND CROSS GOVINDARAJNAGAR VIJAYANAGAR BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU-560 040 3. SRI. S SHYAMASUNDAR S/O LATE SHIVARAM AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT NO.805, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS BEHIND GOVERNMENT COLLEGE SRS ROAD, PEENYA BENGALURU NORTH PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES BENGALURU-560 058 Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50306 CRP No. 613 of 2025 SMT. S PADMAVATHI W/O LATE K B CHANDRASHEKHARAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT NO.822, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS, BEHIND GOVERNMENT COLLEGE SRS ROAD, PEENYA BENGALURU NORTH PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES BENGALURU-560058 (SINCE DEAD HER LR'S RESPONDEN NOS.5 AND 6 5. SRI KISHORE C S/O LATE K B CHANDRASHEKHARAIAH AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT NO.822, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS BEHIND GOVERNMENT COLLEGE SRS ROAD, PEENYA BENGALURU NORTH PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES BENGALURU-560058 6. SMT. PRAJWAL C S/O LATE K B CHANDRASHEKHARAIAH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/AT NO.822 3RD MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS BEHIND GOVERNMENT COLLEGE SRS ROAD, PEENYA BENGALURU NORTH PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES BENGALURU-560 058 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CHANDAN B K, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. VIHA K D/O S. KRISHNA AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS REPRESENTED BY - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50306 CRP No. 613 of 2025 NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER SMT.B.PRAMEELA W/O S.KRISHNA D/O BORALINGAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT NO.805, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS BEHIND GOVERNMENT COLLEGE SRS ROAD, PEENYA BENGALURU NORTH PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES BENGALURU-560 058 2. MR.S.KRISHNA S/O LATE SHIVARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT NO.822, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS BEHIND GOVERNMENT COLLEGE SRS ROAD, PEENYA BENGALURU NORTH PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES BENGALURU-560 058 3. THIMMESH S/O BILIYAIAH MUDDENAHALLI VILLAGE DEVALAPURA HOBLI NAGAMANGALA TALUK MANDYA – 571 445 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIVEK.T.N FOR SRI ABHINAV.R, ADVOCATES FOR C/R IN CP 12316/2025; VIDE ORDER DATED 21.11.2025, NOTICE TO PROPOSED R2 AND R3 DISPENSED WITH) THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 4.06.2025 PASSED ON IA NO.IV IN OS NO.8138/2023 ON THE FILE OF X ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50306 CRP No. 613 of 2025 SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-26), REJECTING THE IA NO.IV FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(a) AND (d) R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC., FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri Chandan B.K., learned counsel for the revision petitioners and Sri Vivek T.N. for Sri Abhinav Ramanand, learned counsel for caveator/respondent. 2. Defendant Nos.2 to 7 in O.S No.8138/2023 on the file of the X Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, are the revision petitioners challenging the Order dated 04.06.2025 dismissing the application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground that plaintiff being the minor daughter of S.Krishna who is the first son of common prepositus Shivaramaiah, who died on 02.11.1993. 3. It is the contention of the revision petitioners that the right to seek for partition did not accrue to the plaintiff, as at the time of opening of the succession, plaintiff was not even born. Thus the suit for partition is not maintainable. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50306 CRP No. 613 of 2025 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the contesting respondent-plaintiff would contend that plaint prayer is specific that she is not claiming the right in the coparcenary property as a coparcener. But she is claiming the right in the joint family property between Shivaramaiah and other defendants which remained joint in the absence of any previous partition and share is sought for in her father's share who is the first defendant and therefore suit is maintainable. 5. Having noticed the said aspect of the matter, learned Trial Judge dismissed the application filed by the defendant Nos.2 to 7. 6. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 7. On such perusal, this Court has bestowed its best attention to the plaint prayer which reads as under: “Wherefore, for the reasons stated above, the Plaintiff most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50306 CRP No. 613 of 2025 I. grant a decree of equitable partition and separate possession in the schedule properties by dividing the same into metes and bounds and allot the share of the plaintiff in the property allotted to the share of defendant No.1. II. To grant decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, henchmen, GPA Holders, or anybody claiming through them from interfering with with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties, item No.12. III. To grant decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, henchmen, GPA Holders, or anybody claiming through them from alienating and from creating any third parties interest till allotting the share in the suit schedule properties. IV. To grant decree declaring the sale deed dtd.28/8/2017, 15/5/2017, 21/1/2017, Gift Deed dtd.7/6/2017, Gift Deed dtd.21/4/2022, another sale deed Dtd. 15/6/2019, 23/2/2006, and another sale deed dtd.23/2/2006 and such other deeds are documents which are effecting the right of the plaintiff are all not binding effect over the plaintiffs' share. V. To grant decree of mesne profit from the date of filing the suit. VI. Directing the defendants to pay the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- per Month to the plaintiff till the property allotted to the share of plaintiff, in accordance with law. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50306 CRP No. 613 of 2025 VII. Grant such other orders or directions as may be deemed fit to grant under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the ends of justice and equity.” 8. Taking note of the fact that there is a specific allegation in the plaint that the property belongs to Shivaramaiah and it remains to be joint family property and therefore, in the absence of any previous partition, plaint cannot be thrown out at the threshold by exercising power vested in the Trial Court under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 9. Assuming that it is the individual property of the Shivaramaiah, Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act would come into operation and the prayer of the plaintiff with regard to the share of first defendant would be considered by the Trial Court in accordance with law. 10. Therefore, the rejection of the application is just and proper which requires no interference in this revision petition. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50306 CRP No. 613 of 2025 11. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. (ii) All the contentions are reserved to be canvassed during the course of trial, in accordance with law. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60