- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14905 W.P. No.19318/2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.19318/2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: M.B. JAYAPPA S/O LATE BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/O DEVAKATHIKOPPA KOTEGANGUR POST SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA 577201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.V. SATEESH CHANDRA, ADV.,) AND: 1. M.B. RAJAPPA S/O LATE BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/O DEVAKATHIKOPPA KOTEGANGUR POST SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA 577201. 2. SMT. SHASHI W/O RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/O DEVAKATHIKOPPA SHIVAMOGGA TALUK SHVAMOGGA 577201. 3. SMT. UMA W/O SHASHIDHAR Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14905 W.P. No.19318/2021 D/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA R/O BELANGI-CHILNGI VILLAGE BHARMA SAGAR (P) CHITRADURGA TALUK CHITRADURGA. 4. ESHWARA S/O LATE BASAPPA .A AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS. 5. GANGADARE S/O LATE BASAPPA .A AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS. RESPONDENT NOS.4 & 5 ARE RESIDING AT GADIKOPPA SHIVAMOGGA 577201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. GURUDHATTA, ADV., FOR R4 & R5 NOTICE TO R1 TO R3 ARE D/W ON 10.02.2022) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED INTERIM ORDER IN I.A.NO.VII PASSED BY THE COURT OF III ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SHIVAMOGGA, IN O.S.NO.868/2014, DTD 23.09.2021 VIDE ANNX-E & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14905 W.P. No.19318/2021 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This petition is filed challenging the order dated 23.09.2021 passed on IA.No.7 filed by proposed defendant Nos.4 and 5 in OS.No.868/2014 by the III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Shivamogga (for short 'the trial Court'). 2. Sri.K.V.Satheesh Chandra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a suit for declaration and partition. In the said suit, respondent Nos.4 and 5 filed an application seeking to implead themselves as parties, which came to be allowed by the trial Court without assigning any proper reasons. It is submitted that the proposed defendants are strangers to the family and therefore, they cannot be arrayed as parties to the suit. However, the said aspect has not been appreciated by the trial Court under the impugned order. Hence, he seeks to allow the petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14905 W.P. No.19318/2021 3. Per contra, Sri.K.Gurudhatta, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 and 5 supports the impugned order of the trial Court and submits that the petitioner/plaintiff filed the suit without arraying the proposed defendants as parties. It is submitted that respondent Nos.4 and 5 are the grandchildren of Sri.A.Basappa and considering the said aspect, the trial Court has rightly allowed the application, which does not call for any interference. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the petition. 4. I have heard the arguments on both the sides and meticulously perused the material available on record. 5. The records indicate that petitioner herein filed a suit in O.S.No.868/2014 seeking judgment and decree by declaring that the Will alleged to have been executed by late Basappa son of Puradappa in favour of defendant No.1 dated 15.04.2010, is not binding on the plaintiff in any manner in getting his 1/3rd share in suit 'A' schedule - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14905 W.P. No.19318/2021 property and consequently seeking partition and separate possession of his 1/3rd share. In the said suit, respondent Nos.4 and 5 filed an application under Order I Rule 10(2) r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC') seeking impleadment as parties to the suit. The said application was opposed by the petitioner. However, the trial Court, under the impugned order, allowed the application. A perusal of the averments made in the affidavit accompanying the application clearly indicates that the proposed defendants claimed to be the grandchildren of Sri.A.Basappa and they claim that the suit schedule property is a joint family property and that they are the co-parceners entitled to a share therein. The trial Court, considering the said assertion, allowed the application. 6. The contention of the petitioner that respondent Nos.4 and 5 are strangers to the family and that they don't have any right in the suit schedule property is a matter that is required to be considered by the trial Court - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14905 W.P. No.19318/2021 during the course of trial. I am of the considered view that the trial Court, by a well-reasoned order, allowed the application for impleadment. I do not find any error in the impugned order calling for interference in the present petition. The writ petition is devoid of merits and accordingly, the same is rejected. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28