- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39921 WP No. 31527 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 31527 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI LOKESH REDDY S/O LATE K. SRINIVASA REDDY HINDU, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.73 KAGGADASAPURA MAIN ROAD C.V. RAMAN NAGAR POST BANGALORE - 560 093. …PETITIONER (BY SRI H.R. ANANTHA KRISHNA MURTHY, ADV.) AND: 1. SRI K. MUTHAIAH S/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS NO.588, 6TH CROSS HOSA ROAD, ELECTRONIC CITY POST, BENGALURU-560 100. 2. SRI C. DHANAPAL S/O CHAKRAVARTHY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS NO.28/1, SIDDANNA LANE CUBBONPET CROSS BENGALURU-560 002. 3. SRI H. SHANKAR S/O LATE KUPPAN AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT NO. 298, 14TH CROSS CHENNA KESHAVA NAGAR C.K.LAYOUT, P.B. JAGADISH ROAD Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39921 WP No. 31527 of 2019 BEHIND LAKSHMI NURSING HOME BENGALURU-560 100. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MOHAN KUMAR D, ADV., FOR R-1 & R-3; V/O/D 18.08.2025, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R-2 IS H/S) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22.03.2019 PASSED IN MIS.NO.309/2018 BY THE PRINCIPAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU, PRODUCED VIDE ANNX-G. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 22.03.2019 passed in Misc.No.309/2018 by the Court of Prl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 3. Petitioner herein has filed O.S.No.3333/2016 which is pending on the file of City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in CCH No.57. Respondent no.3 - Shankar has filed O.S.No.22/2011 which is pending before the Court of City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in CCH No.45. Misc.No.309/2018 was filed by the petitioner under Section 24 of CPC with a - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39921 WP No. 31527 of 2019 prayer to transfer O.S.No.3333/2016 pending on the file of CCH No.57 to CCH No.45, where O.S.No.22/2011 is pending. The said petition was dismissed by the Court of Prl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, by the order impugned, and being aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that though the suit schedule properties are not common, the said properties are carved out of the same survey number and some of the parties are common in both the suits, and therefore, the learned Prl. City Civil & Sessions Judge was not justified in dismissing Misc. No.309/2018. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel for the respondent has argued in support of the impugned order. 6. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that the suit in O.S.No.3333/2016, which is filed by the petitioner is pending on the file of CCH No.57 and in the said suit, relief of declaration of title in respect of property measuring 2000 sq. ft. in Sy.No.52/1 of Parappana Agrahaara Village, Begur Hobli, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39921 WP No. 31527 of 2019 Bengaluru South Taluk, is sought. Suit in O.S.No.22/2011 is filed by respondent no.3 to this petition which is pending on the file of CCH No.45, and in the said suit, relief of permanent injunction is sought in respect of Site No.298, Old Khatha No.60/2, New Khatha No.730 and Assessment No.60/2. 7. From the aforesaid, it is apparent that the suit schedule properties are totally different. Respondent nos.1 & 2 in this petition are not parties to O.S.No.22/2011. The nature of relief sought in the suit and the properties in both suits are also different, and therefore, the Prl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, has rightly rejected the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 24 CPC. 8. I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the said order, which calls for interference at the hands of this Court. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KK