- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32799 WP No. 22174 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 22174 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI MUNEGOWDA S/O SHANKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT ALLALASANDRA VILLAGE, YELAHANKA HOBLI, GKVK POST, BENGALURU-560064 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATH G KANDEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SHANKARAPPA S/O LATE CHIKKADODDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS 2. SRI. APPANNAGOWDA S S/O SHANKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 3. SRI. MUNIRAJU. S S/O SHANKARAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 4. SRI. SATHISH GOWDA S S/O SHANKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS 5. SRI. ADISHESHA .S S/O SHANKARAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32799 WP No. 22174 of 2022 RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 5 ARE RESIDING AT ALLALASANDRA VILLAGE, YELAHANKA HOBLI, GKVK POST BENGALURU - 560 065 6. SRI. SURENDRA KUMAR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER SRI. DARMASTHALA MANJUNATHESHWARA EDUCATION SOCIETY, UJJARE, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT – 574 240 7. M/S TOWNSHIP PROMOTERS, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.9, 8TH MAIN RMV EXTENSION, BENGALURU-560080 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SRI. P. ASHWIN PAI 8. M/S ABHISHEK DEVELOPERS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, OFFICE AT NO. 41, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR. SUSHIL MANTRI …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHIVARAMU H.C., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3 SMT. APARNA .N, FOR SMT. BHAVANA G.K. ADVOCATES FOR R6 SRI. ABHISHEK PATIL FOR SRI. CHANDAN .K., ADVOCATES FOR R7 SIR. K. VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R8 R4 AND R5 ARE SERVED) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32799 WP No. 22174 of 2022 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN OS NO.6841/2016 PENDING ON THE FILE LII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE (CCH-53). AND ETC., THIS WRIT 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 petition is filed challenging the order dated 05.03.2022 passed on I.A.No.2/2021 in O.S.No.6841/2016 by the LII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (for short, ‘the Trial Court’). 2. Heard Sri.Manjunath G. Kandekal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Shivaramu H.C., learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3, Smt.Aparna N., learned counsel for the respondent No.6, Sri.Abhishek Patil, learned counsel for the respondent No.7 and Sri.K.Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent No.8. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32799 WP No. 22174 of 2022 3. The petitioner has filed a suit in O.S.No.6841/2016 seeking the relief of partition and separate possession. In the said suit, the defendants have filed written statement and contested the suit. It is to be noticed that during the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff has settled the dispute with the defendant Nos.7 and 8 and based on such settlement, the suit against the said defendants came to be dismissed. 4. In the said suit, the plaintiff filed an application in I.A.No.2/2021 under Order I Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘the CPC’) to implead the proposed defendants as defendant Nos.9 to 18. The said application was opposed by the other defendants. The Trial Court, under the impugned order rejected the said application. It is to be noticed that the suit is for partition and separate possession and the proposed defendants are the vendors of defendant No.6. The Trial Court, considering the said aspect has recorded the reason that the plaintiff has not challenged the sale deed produced at - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32799 WP No. 22174 of 2022 Ex.P3 and the vendors of the defendant No.6 are neither necessary nor proper parties as already the defendant No.6, who is the owner of the property in Ex.P3 is on record and proceeded to dismiss the application. I do not find any error in the order passed by the Trial Court calling for interference in this petition. 5. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly rejected. (ii) The Trial Court shall endure to dispose of the suit as early as possible. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42