- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1145 WP No. 106681 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 106681 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: RAMAPPA S/O. KAREPPA JONGANAVAR, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED GOVERNMENT SERVANT, R/O. H.NO.3062, CHAWDI GALLI, MUDHOL ROAD, JAMKHANDI-587301, TQ: JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASHANT S. KADADEVAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SAYYAD S/O. YOUNAS FAZIL, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. S.S. PALYA, NERLEKERE, CHITRADURGA-577501. 2. LAXMAN S/O. BASAPPA NYAMAGOUDA, AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SHIRAGUPPAI-587119, TQ: JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.L. MATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1-HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON I.A. NO.8 DATED 15.10.2024 PASSED IN O.S. NO.138/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT: JAMKHANDI (ANNEXURE- F) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1145 WP No. 106681 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: i. Issue writ in the nature of Certiorari by quashing the impugned order on I.A. No.8 dated 15.10.2024 passed in O.S. No.138/2021 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge at: Jamkhandi (ANNEXURE-F). ii. Issue any other writ or direction as deem fit by this Hon’ble Court in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The petitioner had filed a suit in O.S.No.138/2021, for the cancellation of the sale deed in respect of the suit property, as also for possession. In the said suit, in the written statement, defendant No.2 had taken up a contention that, one Mr. Vijayakumar Balamatti is also a necessary party, and in his absence, the suit cannot be effectively tried and decided. 3. Further, submissions have been made as regards the relationship of Vijayakumar Balamatti with one Mr.Abdul Mujeeb. It is in that background that, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1145 WP No. 106681 of 2024 belatedly, the petitioner had filed I.A.No.8 to implead the said Vijayakumar Balamatti, represented by his GPA holder and the aforesaid Mr.Abdul Mujeeb, which came to be objected to by defendant No.2 on the ground that no reliefs have been sought for against them and that, in order to create confusion, tagging a transaction, which is not related to the present suit, they were sought to be made parties. 4. The Trial Court, vide the impugned order dated 15.10.2024, rejected the application on the ground that the matter being posted for final arguments, the application has been filed belatedly to protract the proceedings and as such, imposed a cost of ₹200/-. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 5. The submission of Sri.Prashant S. Kadadevar, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that it is by inadvertence that the petitioner could not implead the said parties earlier and also despite the averment being made in - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1145 WP No. 106681 of 2024 the written statement, though the matter is posted for final arguments, this Court may allow the application on terms, which the petitioner would adhere to and comply with. 6. The submission of Sri. S. L. Matti, learned counsel for respondent No.2/defendant No.2, again is that the matter is being protracted and that an unrelated transaction is sought to be brought on record, as regards which the parties have already compromised and which has attained finality. 7. Heard Sri. Prashant S. Kadadevar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. S. L. Matti, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the papers. 8. Though the matter is posted for final arguments, it cannot be disputed that in the pleadings filed by defendant No.2, there is specific averment made that Mr.Vijayakumar Balamatti and Mr.Abdul Mujeeb are related to the transaction, and there is specific - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1145 WP No. 106681 of 2024 averment made that, without Mr.Vijayakumar Balamatti being made a party, the suit cannot be decided effectively. 9. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the application would have to be allowed, of course, by imposing suitable terms on the petitioner. 10. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i. Writ petition is allowed. ii. The order dated 15.10.2024 passed in I.A.No.8 in O.S.No.138/2021 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Jamkhandi, at Annexure ‘F’ is set aside. iii. Consequently, I.A.No.8 is allowed, subject to the payment of cost of ₹5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Advocate Clerks’ Association, High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, within a period of 10 days from today, i.e., on or before 04.02.2025. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1145 WP No. 106681 of 2024 iv. The Trial Court is directed to issue notice on I.A.No.8 to the persons named therein and thereafter proceed with the matter. v. Needless to say that, any compromise already entered into and having attained finality as regards any other property will not be subject matter of the suit. vi. Submission of Sri.Prashant S. Kadadevar, that he would cooperate with the Trial Court for speedy disposal of the matter is placed on record. vii. If services were not got to be effected within a reasonable time on the proposed defendants, defendant No.2 could also be permitted to take out hand summons on the proposed defendants. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE gab CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14