SMT JYOTHI D/O. MALLIKARJUNA v. MALLIKARJUNA S/O. LATE NAGAPPA
WP/104668/2025 · 2025-08-01
Suraj Govindaraj
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 85434 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 85434 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9540 WP No. 104668 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO.104668 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. JYOTHI D/O. MALLIKARJUNA, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. MAKANADAKU VILLAGE, KUDLIGI TQ., VIJAYANAGAR DIST.-583126. 2. SMT. SHANTHAMMA D/O. MALLIKARJUNA, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, AGE: 35 YEARS, R/O. MAKANADAKU VILLAGE, KUDLIGI TQ., VIJAYANAGAR DIST. 583126. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. BASAVANA GOUD T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MALLIKARJUNA S/O. LATE NAGAPPA, AGE. 74 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED TEACHER, OBALAPURA VILLAGE, PRESENTLY R/O. THAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, KUDLIGI TQ. VIJAYANAGARA DIST.-583218. 2. SHIVAPRASHAD S/O. MALLIKARJUNA, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. MAKANADAKU VILLAGE, KUDLIGI TQ., VIJAYANAGAR DIST.-583126. 3. SMT. DEVERAMMA W/O. LATE MANJUNATHA, D/O. MALLIKARJUNA, AGE: 53 YEARS, R/O. MAKANADAKU VILLAGE, KUDLIGI TQ., VIJAYANAGAR DIST.-583126. Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9540 WP No. 104668 of 2025
4. SMT. NINGAMMA W/O. VASANTHA D/O. MALLIKARJUNA, AGE: 47 YEARS, R/O. ABBENAHALLI VILLAGE, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DIST.-577536. 5. G. THIPPESWAMY S/O. LATE THIPPANNA, AGE: 91 YEARS, OCC. NIL, R/O. THAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, KUDLIGI TQ., VIJAYANAGAR DIST.-583218. …RESPONDENTS
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, BY QUASHING THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 26-07-2023, PASSED ON IA NO. XI, IN F.D.P. NO.03/2014 (ANNEXURE-E) PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUDLIGI AND PASS SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER ORDER OR ORDERS OR ANY OTHER RELIEF OR RELIEFS IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS AS DEEMS FIT TO THIS HON’BLE COURT, WHICH WOULD MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: i. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, by quashing the Judgment and Order dated 26-07-2023, passed on IA No. XI, in F.D.P. No. 03/2014 (Annexure-E) passed by the learned Civil Judge and JMFC Kudligi. - 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9540 WP No. 104668 of 2025
ii.
Pass such other and further order or orders or any other relief or reliefs in favour of the petitioners as deems fit to this Hon’ble Court, which would meet the ends of justice and equity. 2. A suit for partition having been filed in O.S.No.68 of 2003, the same came to be decreed, in pursuance of which, FDP No.03 of 2014 has been filed, wherein an application under Order XX Rule 18(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed to include one of the properties on the ground that there is a discussion in the decree, but the property was not allotted to the petitioners. The said application came to be rejected by the FDP Court on the ground that the FDP Court cannot go behind the preliminary decree and would only have to implement the preliminary decree. 3. I do not find any infirmity with the said order. If the petitioners were aggrieved by any portion of the decree passed in O.S.No.68 of 2003, and if it was for correction, they could have moved an application before the same court and/or filed an appeal. - 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9540 WP No. 104668 of 2025
Neither having been done, the property not allotted to the petitioners cannot be sought to be brought on record in the FDP proceedings. 4. The petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE
gab Ct:pa LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 78