- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50685 WP No. 9195 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 9195 OF 2020 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: D.U. SREENIVASA S/O LATE D.S. UPENDRA BHATTA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS NO 7 4TH MAIN JAYANAGARA MYSURU - 570 014. …PETITIONER (BY SRI G. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADV.) AND: 1. D .U. RAVINDRA S/O LATE D S UPENDRA BHATTA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRs 1a. SMT. PADMAJA W/O LATE D.U RAVINDRA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS. 1b. VINAY D.R S/O ALTE D.U RAVINDRA AGED 47 YEARS. 1c. SHILPA D.R D/O LATE D.U RAVINDRA AGED 42 YEARS. NO. 1a. TO NO.1(c) RESIDING AT NO.116 12TH CROSS IDLI HOUSE, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50685 WP No. 9195 of 2020 BANGALORE - 560 098. 2. SMT. D.U. INDIRA D/O LATE D.S. UPENDRA BHATTA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. 3. SRI D U ASHOK S/O LATE D S UPENDRA BHATTA AGE 62 YEARS. PLAINTIFFS NO.1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT NO.913 28TH CROSS VIDYARANYAPURAM MYSURU - 570 017. 4. SRI D.U. NATARAJ S/O D.S. UPENDRA BHATTA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS NO.101, 4TH CROSS AGB II STAGE, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT BANGALORE - 560 086. 5. SRI D.U. DATTARAJ S/O LATE D.S. UPENDRA BHATTA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS NO.31 BRINDAVAN LAYOUT PADMANABHA NAGARA BENGALURU - 560 061. 6. SRI CHOWDAPPA S/O LATE NARASIMHAIAH MAJOR NO.1124 BEML LAYOUT RAJARAJESHWARINAGAR BOGADHI 2ND STAGE MYSURU - 570 022. 7. SMT. REKHA S/O B. SIDDARAJU MAJOR. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50685 WP No. 9195 of 2020 8. SRI B. SRAMESH S/O B. SIDDARAJU MAJOR. RESPONDENT NO.7 AND 8 ARE RESIDING AT # 82/A NEW NO.7/A, 4TH MAIN 8TH CROSS, JAYANAGARA MYSURU - 570 014. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI ABHINAY S, ADV., FOR R-1a TO R-1(c) & R-2 TO R-5; SRI A. MADHUSUDHAN RAO, ADV., FOR R-7 & R-8; R-6 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AN ORDER DATED 16.06.2020 IN FDP NO.64/2017 PASSED BY THE 1 ADDITONAL SENIOR CIVIL AND CJM MYSORE PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND I.A.NO.II BE ALLOWED AS PRAYED FORGRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE FURTHER PROCEEDINGS FDP NO.64/2017 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL AND CJM MYSORE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. Defendant is before this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to set-aside the order dated 16.06.2020 passed on IA No.2 in FDP No.64/2017 by the Court of I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mysuru, vide Annexure-A. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50685 WP No. 9195 of 2020 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Respondent Nos.1 and 5 herein, who are decree holders in OS No.497/2009 have initiated final decree proceedings before the Trial Court in FDP No.64/2017 for drawing the final decree in terms of the preliminary decree that was drawn in OS No.497/2009 by the jurisdictional Civil Court at Mysuru, wherein plaintiffs and defendant have been granted 1/5th share each in the suit schedule property bearing No.82 situated at Chamrajamohalla, Mysuru totally measuring 2,310 sq.ft. In the said proceedings, IA No.2 was filed on behalf of the petitioner herein, who is respondent in the said proceedings with a prayer to implead respondent Nos.6 to 8 herein as party respondent Nos.2 to 4 in the final decree proceedings. The said application was opposed by the proposed respondents by filing objections. The Trial Court vide the order impugned has dismissed IA No.2 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 the property bearing - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50685 WP No. 9195 of 2020 No.82 totally measured 4,200 sq. ft. Under a registered Partition Deed dated 05.01.1996, a portion of the said property measuring 1098 sq. ft. was allotted to the share of D.U.Ravindra, who is respondent No.1 in this writ petition. Subsequently, a Gift Deed dated 17.03.2023 was executed in his favour by D.U. Upendra Bhat viz. his father, gifting 824 sq. ft. of land in the property bearing No.82. D.U.Ravindra has thereafter executed Sale Deed in favour of proposed respondent No.6 in respect of the property which was gifted to him by his father. The property which is sold under the Sale Deed is much more than the property which was gifted to D.U.Ravindra. Therefore, though a preliminary decree is passed in respect of 2,310 sq. ft. of land in property bearing No.82, the said extent of land is not available at the spot and therefore, the purchasers of the land from D.U.Ravindra are just and necessary parties to the proceedings. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the contesting respondents submits that the proposed respondents have purchased property from D.U.Ravindra. The extent of land - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50685 WP No. 9195 of 2020 which had come to the share of the aforesaid D.U.Ravindra and the property which was gifted to him by his father is not part and parcel of the suit schedule property. Therefore, proposed respondents are not necessary parties to the proceedings. The Trial Court having appreciated this aspect of the matter has rightly rejected the application. Accordingly, they pray to dismiss the petition. 6. It is not in dispute that the suit schedule property bearing No.82 totally measures 4,200 sq. ft. Under a registered Partition Deed dated 05.01.1996, the aforesaid D.U.Ravindra was allotted 1098 sq. ft. of land in property No.82. Subsequently, on 17.03.2023, D.S.Upendra Bhat, father of respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein, had executed a registered Gift Deed in favour of D.U.Ravindra in respect of 824 sq. ft. of land in property bearing No.82. Thereby, D.U.Ravindra had acquired right and interest under the aforesaid two documents to an extent of land measuring 1922 sq. ft. in property bearing No.82. Under registered Sale Deed dated 05.01.2006, the aforesaid D.U.Ravindra having referred to the aforesaid two title deeds under which he had acquired right over portion of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50685 WP No. 9195 of 2020 the property bearing No.82, has sold an extent of land totally measuring 1,890 sq. ft. in favour of the proposed respondent No.6, out of the total extent of 1922 sq. ft. of land, for which he had acquired right, title and interest under the aforesaid two deeds. Schedule of the Sale Deed dated 05.01.2006 would also go to show that there is a mention of common passage measuring 3 ft. x 54 ft. Therefore, it cannot be said that D.U.Ravindra has executed Sale Deed over and above the extent of land for which he had acquired title under the aforesaid two Deeds. 7. It is not in dispute that the title deeds under which D.U.Ravindra has acquired title and interest over the extent of land measuring 1922 sq. ft. has not been questioned in the suit nor the Sale Deed which was executed by him has been questioned. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the Trial Court was completely justified in arriving at a conclusion that the proposed respondents, who claim right, title and interest over a portion of the property bearing No. 82 under the aforesaid D.U.Ravindra, who had acquired title over the said property under the aforesaid two deeds dated - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50685 WP No. 9195 of 2020 05.01.1996 and 17.03.2003 are not necessary or proper parties to the proceedings. Therefore, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. Under the circumstances, I am not inclined to entertain this petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. 8. In view of the disposal of the main petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the same is disposed off. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE DN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10