- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12501 W.P. No.5772/2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.5772/2020 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. K. VIJAYKUMAR SON OF LATE KENDAIAH AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.13, BINNY LAYOUT 1ST MAIN ROAD, VIJAYANAGAR CLUB ROAD BENGALURU-560040. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KRISHNA MURTHY V, ADV.,) AND: 1. SMT. NALINA .S DAUGHTER OF SRI. B. SREENIVASAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.2646, 1ST FLOOR 4TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN ROAD E BLOCK, SAHAKARANAGAR BENGALURU-32. 2. SMT. SUSHEELAMMA @ GANGAMMA WIFE OF SRI. B. SREENIVASAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.6, 3RD CROSS 2ND MAIN ROAD, L.N.PURA BENGALURU-560021. 3. SRI. B. MURTHY SON OF LATE BYLAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12501 W.P. No.5772/2020 RESIDING AT NO.3398, OPP S.B.M. 4TH CROSS, GAYATHRINAGAR BENGALURU-560021. 4. SRI. B. RAVIPRAKASH S/O LATE BYLAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.6, 3RD CROSS 2ND MAIN ROAD, L.N.PURA BEGNALURU-560021. 5. SMT. SUMANGALA DAUGHTER OF BYLAPPA WIFE OF SRI. G. SIDDAIAH AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.486, 2ND CROSS 3RD C MAIN ROAD, MANJUNATHANAGR BENGALURU-560010. 6. SMT. B. JAYALAKSHMI DAUGHTER OF BYLAPPA WIFE OF SRI. M.B. GOWDA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.2622, 9TH CROSS 14TH MAIN ROAD, SAHAKARANAGAR BENGALURU-32. 7. SMT. BHAGYALAKSHMI @ SEEMA DAUGHTER OF LATE BYLAPPA WIFE OF MR. NOOR AHMED AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.173, 1ST CROSS 4TH MAIN ROAD, VIVEKNAGAR BENGALURU-47. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHWATHNARAYANA REDDY Y.V. ADV., FOR R1 & R3 SRI. K.B. LOKANATH, ADV., FOR C/R2) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12501 W.P. No.5772/2020 THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 21.12.2019 ANNX- H PASSED IN I.A.NO.4 IN FDP NO.46/2014, FILED U/O I RULE 10(2) R/W ORDER 20 RULE 18 ALONG WITH SEC. 151 OF CPC BY THE XX ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE (CCH-32) AT BENGALURU & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: "1. Issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash the Order Dated 21.12.2019 [Annexure-H] passed on I.A.No.4 in FDP.No.46/2014, filed under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Order 20 Rule 18 along with Section 151 of CPC by the XX Addl. City Civil Judge (CCH-32), at Bengaluru. 2. Further, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the I.A.No.4 in FDP.No.46/2014, filed under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Order 20 Rule 18 along with Section 151 of CPC on the file of XX Addl. City Civil Judge (CCH-32), at Bengaluru. [Annexure-F], in the interest of justice and equity. 3. Issue any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Sri.Krishna Murthy V., learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a suit in - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12501 W.P. No.5772/2020 O.S.No.7046/2011 seeking the relief of specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 01.12.2006 which came to be decreed. Being aggrieved, the respondents have preferred RFA.No.641/2022 which is pending consideration before this Court. It is submitted that respondent Nos.1 and 2 have filed O.S.No.4032/2011 against respondent Nos.3 to 7 for partition and separate possession and the said suit came to be decreed. Pursuant thereto, respondent Nos.1 and 2 initiated final decree proceedings in FDP.No.46/2014 against respondent Nos.3 to 7 for drawing up of the final decree based on the preliminary decree in O.S.No.4032/2011. It is further submitted that the petitioner herein has filed an application seeking to implead himself as a party in FDP.No.46/2014 which came to be rejected, and the same is under challenge in the present writ petition. It is also submitted that in the pending RFA, this Court has granted an interim protection to the petitioner by directing that the FDP proceedings shall not be precipitated during the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12501 W.P. No.5772/2020 pendency of the appeal. In view of the same, he seeks to dispose of the writ petition. 3. Per contra, Sri.Aswathanarayana Reddy Y.V., learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 3 and Sri.K.B Lokanath, learned counsel for respondent No.2 support the order of the trial Court and submit that the petitioner is only an agreement holder and no rights are conferred on him by way of such agreement. It is further submitted that the suit which was decreed in favour of the petitioner is assailed before this Court in the regular first appeal, which is pending adjudication. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be termed as a necessary or a proper party to the final decree proceedings. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the petition. 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondents and meticulously perused the material available on record. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12501 W.P. No.5772/2020 5. The material on record indicates that the petitioner claims rights based on the agreement of sale dated 01.12.2006. The said agreement was sought to be enforced in O.S.No.7046/2011, which was decreed in his favour and the same was challenged by the landowners in RFA.No.641/2022, which is pending adjudication before this Court. It is to be noticed that meanwhile, respondent Nos.1 and 2 instituted O.S.No.4032/2011 for partition and separate possession, which came to be decreed. Thereafter, they initiated final decree proceedings in FDP.No.46/2014, wherein the petitioner has filed an application to implead himself in the said proceedings and the same came to be rejected by the FDP Court under the impugned order. 6. It is pertinent to note that in the RFA filed by the respondents, a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.06.2022 has passed a detailed order, wherein the appellants are directed not to precipitate the final - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12501 W.P. No.5772/2020 decree proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. In view of the aforesaid order, the right of the petitioner has been protected till the adjudication of the appeal filed by the respondents. Accordingly, taking note of the interim order dated 03.06.2022 passed by the Division Bench in RFA.No.641/22, the writ petition is disposed of, keeping all the contentions open to be adjudicated before the pending RFA. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8