- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28017 RP No. 210 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR REVIEW PETITION NO. 210 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT. RAJAMMA W/O SRI. PUTTAREVAIAH, D/O SRI. THIMMAPPA, AGE: 55 YEARS, R/AT: KANIMINAKE COLONY, KUMBALAGUDU POST, KENGERI HOBLI, TALUK: BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU-560 074. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVINDRA PRASAD B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. THIMMAPPA @ THIMMAIAH S/O LATE. NARASIMHAIAH, AGE: 75 YEARS, R/AT: KANIMINAKE COLONY, KUMBALAGUDU POST, KENGERI HOBLI, TALUK: BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU-560 074. SRI. NARASIMHAIAH, S/O SRI. THIMMAPPA, SINCE DECEASED AND REPRESENTED HEREIN BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES, RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3. 2. SMT. RANGAMMA, W/O LATE. NARASIMHAIAH, AGE: 55 YEARS, R/AT: KANIMINAKE COLONY, KUMBALAGUDU POST, Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28017 RP No. 210 of 2025 KENGERI HOBLI, TALUK: BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU-560 074. 3. SRI. RAMU W/O LATE. NARASIMHAIAH, AGE: 30 YEARS, R/AT: KANIMINAKE COLONY, KUMBALAGUDU POST, KENGERI HOBLI, TALUK: BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU-560 074. 4. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O SRI. SEENAPPA, D/O SRI. THIMAPPA, AGE: 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT: KODIYALA KARENAHALLI VILLAGE, KARENAHALLI POST, BIDADI HOBLI, TQ: AND DIST: RAMANAGARA-562 109. 5. SRI. LAKSHMANA S/O SRI. THIMMAPPA, AGE: 48 YEARS, R/AT: KANIMINAKE COLONY, KUMBALAGODU POST, KENGERI HOBLI, TALUK: BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU-560 074. 6. SRI. VENKATESH S/O SRI. THIMMAPPA, AGE: 45 YEARS, R/AT: KANIMINAKE COLONY, KUMBALAGODU POST, KENGERI HOBLI, TALUK: BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU-560 074. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C.K. NANDAKUMAR, SENIOR COUNSEL ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAGHURAM KADAMBI, ADVOCATE) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILE UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 04.04.2025 PASSED IN MFA NO.880 OF 2025 BY THIS HON’BLE HIGH COURT AND FURTHER DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER IS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28017 RP No. 210 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) This review petition is filed by the plaintiff against the order passed by this Court dated 04.04.2025 in MFA No.880/2025. 2. For the sake of convenience and easy reference, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Trial Court. 3. It is submitted that, the plaintiff/appellant is going to change nature of land to the entire extent of 38 guntas. But the order is only confined to 18,000 sq. ft. Therefore, prays to modify the order passed by this Court permitting to establish petrol bunk at 18,000 sq. ft of land. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents/defendants submitted that petrol bunk is constructed only on 18,000 sq. ft as ordered by this Court and not more than that extent and that would be subject to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28017 RP No. 210 of 2025 result of the suit. Therefore, submitted that there is no necessity for reviewing the order. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff submitted that item No.9 property is having an area of 38 guntas. Though this Court has passed an order permitting to establish petrol bunk on 18,000 sq. ft of land, but there are already structures, were put up during pendency of the suit, by changing nature of land. Therefore, the defendants have changed entire nature of land to the extent of 38 guntas. Therefore, prays to review the order permitting to establish petrol bunk on 18,000 sq. ft of land. 6. When this being the rival contention, item No.9 property is having an extent of 38 guntas, this Court ordered not to alienate all the suit properties in favour of third parties. But the order of the Trial Court is modified only to the extent of permitting defendants/respondents to establish petrol bunk on 18,000 sq. ft land only. During pendency of the suit, and before passing the order passed by this Court in the miscellaneous first appeal, if structures were put up by - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28017 RP No. 210 of 2025 the defendants, then that would be subject to result of the suit. Since as per the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff, the entire nature of land to the extent of 38 guntas is changed, but except 18,000 sq. ft of land. On other portion, as per the plaintiff, structures were put up during pendency of the suit and also before the order passed by this Court in miscellaneous first appeal. Therefore, it is clarified that, whatever structures were put up on other portion of 38 guntas of land during pendency of the suit and before passing the order by this Court in miscellaneous first appeal, that would be subject to result of the suit. Therefore, on this ground, for other remaining 18,000 sq. ft of land, the work of establishment of petrol bunk cannot be stopped, for the reason that, even if the suit decreed, the plaintiff would get 1/6th share in all the suit properties. Therefore, when the plaintiff is entitled at the most 1/6th share, then halting the establishment of petrol bunk only on 18,000 sq. ft, is not correct. It is made clear that whatever establishment of petrol bunk and structures are put up during pendency of the suit that would be subject - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28017 RP No. 210 of 2025 to result of the suit including the share of land, on which, petrol bunk is established. Therefore, it is made clear that, if defendants establish petrol bunk on 18,000 sq. ft of land and structures were put up on other portion of land that would be subject to result of the suit and the defendants shall not claim equity. 7. Therefore, with these observations, the review petition stands disposed off. SD/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE PMP CT:BCK LIST NO.: 19 SL NO.: 1