- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8329 WP No. 453 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 453 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. N. M. KANTHAMMA W/O T R VASANTHKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, HOUSEHOLD, R/AT NANDIHALLI VILLAGE, PITLALLI POST, HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577511 2. SMT N M UMADEVI W/O D S BASAVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, HOUSEHOLD, R/AT DONNEHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, JAGALUR TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577528 3. SRI N M SWAMY S/O N R MALLANNA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NANDIHALLI VILLAGE, PITLALI POST, HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577511 4. N M MANASA D/O LATE N M UMA MAHESHWARA, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8329 WP No. 453 of 2025 R/AT NANDIHALLI VILLAGE, PITLALI POST, HIRIYUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577511 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRASANNA B R.,ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. G. RAVIKUMAR S/O LATE S GURUSIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, BUSINESS MAN, R/AT NETHAJI SHUBASH CHANDRA BOSE BADAVANE, 4TH CROSS, HIRIYUR TOWN, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577598 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SOHAN H M.,ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TOQUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 05/11/2024 ON IA NO. 14 IN OS NO. 11/2016 PASSED BY THE HONBLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HIRIYURU VIDE ANN- H.GRANT AN AD-INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 05/11/2024 ON IA NO. 14 IN OS NO. 11/2016 ON THE FILE OF HONBLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HIRIYURU PENDING DISPOSAL OF THE ABOVE WP. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8329 WP No. 453 of 2025 ORAL ORDER This petition by the plaintiff in O.S.No.11/2016 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Hiriyuru, is directed against the impugned order dated 05.11.2024 whereby the application IA No.14 filed by the respondent seeking to come on record as an additional defendant in the suit under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC was allowed by the trial Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. 3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioners invited my attention to the impugned order as well as the material on record in order to point out that at the time of institution of the suit, the defendant No.1 Shantha Kumari was alive and upon her expiry, a memo was filed by the parties to the effect that the plaintiffs and defendants No.2 to 18 are the only legal representatives of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8329 WP No. 453 of 2025 deceased defendant No.1 and the plaint was amended accordingly. 4. Thereafter the respondent filed an impleadment application seeking impleadment interalia contending that he was the brother of the deceased defendant No.1 who had also executed registered will dated 09.10.2020 in his favour. The said application having been opposed by the petitioner - plaintiff, the trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned order allowing the application, aggrieved by which the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 5. A perusal of the material on record including the impugned order will clearly indicate that the respondent claims not only to be the brother of the deceased defendant No.1 Shantakumari, but also a legatee under her alleged will dated 09.10.2020, prior to her demise on 06.08.2023. The said issue/question as to whether the respondent would be entitled to claim the share of deceased defendant No.1 in the suit schedule property either as her brother or as a legatee under the will is a question/issue which would necessarily have to be decided - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8329 WP No. 453 of 2025 along with other issues in the suit and not at the time of considering an application for impleadment under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC. In other words, in the light of the specific assertion on the part of the respondent that he is both the brother of deceased defendant No.1 Shantakumari as well as an alleged legatee under an alleged will dated 09.10.2020 alleged to have been executed by deceased Shantakumari in his favour, I am of the considered opinion that the trial Court came to the correct conclusion that the said issue had to be decided only after a full- fledged trial and allowed the application for the limited purpose of permitting the respondent to come on record as an additional defendant in the suit. 6. 6. It is needless to state that since the trial Court has not rendered any finding as regards the alleged will dated 09.10.2020 alleged to have been executed by Shantakumari nor declared that the respondent/impleading applicant would be entitled to a share in the suit schedule property and the said question/issue is still at large to be decided by the trial Court, it cannot be said that any prejudice would be caused to the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8329 WP No. 453 of 2025 petitioner if the respondent is permitted to be impleaded as an additional defendant to the suit. 7. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order passed by the trial Court permitting impleadment cannot be said to suffer from any illegality as held by the Apex Court in the cases of Radhey Shyam Vs. Chhabi Nath - (2015) 5 SCC 423, K.P. Natarajan Vs. Muthalammal – AIR 2021 SC 3443 and Mohamed Ali Vs. V. Jaya & others – (2022) 10 SCC 477. 8. In the result, the following - ORDER (i) The petition is hereby disposed of without interfering with the impugned order. (ii) It is made clear that the impleadment of the respondent as an additional defendant in the suit will not tantamount to upholding the will dated 09.10.2020 nor the right of the respondent over the suit schedule properties and all rival contentions in - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8329 WP No. 453 of 2025 this regard are left/kept open to be decided by the trial Court in accordance with law. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE YKL List No.: 2 Sl No.: 36