- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29327 W.P. No.22392/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.22392/2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. T. ANANDA KUMAR S/O LATE THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS. 2. SMT. T. SUREKHA D/O LATE THIMMAIAH W/O SUDHAKAR AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS. 3. SMT. T. BABY D/O LATE THIMMAIAH W/O NANJUNDAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS. ALL ARE R/AT MUNIVEERAMMA STREET GANDHI SQUARE, NEW PET ANEKAL TOWN TUMAKURU DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAJATH D.V. ADV., FOR SRI. G. MANIVANNAN, ADV.,) AND: 1. DR. K.T. PRAKASH REDDY W/O THIMMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT NO.335, II PHASE 2ND CROSS, ROYAL LATE FRONT Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29327 W.P. No.22392/2022 RESIDENCY, JAMBUSAVARI DINNE JP NAGAR, VIII PHASE BENGALURU-560078. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M. MADHUSUDAN, ADV., FOR SRI. V. VISWANATH SETTY, ADV.,) - - - THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS IN O.S.NO.218 OF 2008 ON THE FILE OF THE HONOURABLE IV ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT ANEKAL, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. QUASH THE ORDER DATED 29.08.2022 PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE IV ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT ANEKAL, IN O.S.NO.218 OF 2008 AT ANNEXURE-A AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO DISMISS THE INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER ORDER XXII RULE 4 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE AT ANNEXURE-H & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 29.08.2022 passed in O.S.No.218/2018 by the IV Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal (for short, 'the Trial Court’). 2. Sri.Rajath D.V., learned counsel for Sri.G.Manivannan, learned counsel for the petitioners - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29327 W.P. No.22392/2022 submits that the respondent has filed a suit against the father of the petitioners for injunction and after the death of the original defendant, an application Under Order XXII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘the CPC’) was filed which came to be allowed by the Trial Court. It is submitted that the suit being for injunction, in the absence of any averments with regard to the legal heirs of the original defendant, the suit is not maintainable. In support of his contentions, he placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of SMT.USHA GOPAL GOWDA Vs. SRI.M.T.THARANATH1. Hence, he seeks to allow the petition. 3. Per contra, Sri.M.Madhusudan, learned counsel for Sri.V.Viswanath Setty, learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff supports the impugned order of the Trial Court and submits that the judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioners has no application to the case on hand as the prayer in the plaint itself makes it 1 W.P.No.15445/2015 dt. 12.10.2018 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29327 W.P. No.22392/2022 clear that the relief is sought against the defendant as well as against his family members, GPA holder, agents and supporters by making a specific assertion that there is interference from the defendant as well as his family members and the cause of action is accordingly shown. Hence, the Trial Court has rightly allowed the application under Order XXII Rule 4 of the CPC, by permitting the legal heirs of the defendant to come on record. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material available on record. 5. The respondent herein has filed O.S.No.218/2008 for the relief of injunction against the defendant-Thimmaiah. A perusal of the plaint indicates that the relief is sought against the defendant as well as his family members and persons claiming under him based on the assertion made in paragraph 12 of the plaint that - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29327 W.P. No.22392/2022 the defendant and his family members, without any right, title, interest or possession over the suit schedule property, are trying to interfere with the plaintiff’s possession over the property. It is to be noticed that if in the absence of any categorical pleading with regard to any of the family members in stricto sensu, the suit for injunction against the legal heirs would not be maintainable. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-plaintiff submits that the plaintiff has made a specific assertion that on 05.04.2008 the defendant along with a group of persons came near the property and tried to dispossess the plaintiff and accordingly have shown the cause of action to file the suit. Based on such a pleading, a prayer is sought not only against the defendant but also against his family members. He fairly submits that even after the death of the defendant, the interference from the legal heirs of the defendant is continued and the cause of action is against the deceased defendant as well as his family members. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29327 W.P. No.22392/2022 He also fairly submits that instead of standing on the technicalities, he would file a fresh suit against the legal heirs of the defendant. In view of his categorical stand in the present proceedings, I am of the considered view that if the plaintiff has a cause of action against the legal heirs of the deceased Thimmaiah, it is always open for him to institute a suit against them. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. The suit in O.S.No.218/2008 would also not survive for consideration. It is open for the petitioners to raise all the contentions if a suit is filed. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42