HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33350 RP No. 47 of 2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU REVIEW PETITION NO. 47 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. AKHILESH.S.V. S/O LATE VIRUPAKSHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT. NO.3509/D125, BASAVESHWARA NAGAR, NEAR WATER TANK, BEHIND SAPTAGIRI HOSTEL, DAVANAGERE – 577 001. 2. KUMARI. TRIVENI.S.V. D/O LATE VIRUPAKSHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT. NO.3509/D125, BASAVESHWARA NAGAR, NEAR WATER TANK, BEHIND SAPTAGIRI HOSTEL, DAVANAGERE-577 001. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RUDRESH.R.S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. DEEPAK.M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. P.VIJAY KUMAR S/O LATE PUNAM CHAND, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT. NO.174/2, NARASARAJPET, DAVANAGERE-577 001. Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33350 RP No. 47 of 2026 2 2. SRI. PRAFULKUMAR S/O LATE MOHAN LAL, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT. NO.174/2, NARASARAJPET, DAVANAGERE – 577 001. 3. SMT. JYOTHI W/O LATE VIRUPAKSHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT. NO.3509/D125, BASAVESHWARA NAGAR, NEAR WATER TANK, BEHIND SAPTAGIRI HOSTEL, DAVANAGERE – 577 001. …RESPONDENTS THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 R/W SEC.114 OF CPC AND ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED:07.01.2026 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NO.15076/ 2021, WHICH WAS DISMISSED BY THIS COURT ON 7.01.2026. THIS REVIEW PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL ORDER 1. The present review petition is filed praying for a review the order dated 07.01.2026 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.15076/2021. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33350 RP No. 47 of 2026 3 2. Although this matter is posted for admission, given the limited issue involved, this Court does not deem it apposite to issue notice in the matter. 3. The Writ Petition No.15076/2021 was dismissed on 07.01.2026 in terms of the report of the registry that the suit in O.S.No.416/2015 itself had abated and that the petition would not survive. 4. The learned counsel for the review petitioners has subsequently filed the present review petition stating that the challenge before this Court was the very order of abatement passed by the learned Trial Court. 4.1. The learned counsel for the review petitioners further submits that even though the order of abatement passed by the learned Trial Court reflects that there is no presence on behalf of the plaintiffs or their counsel, it was not noticed by the learned Trial Court, that the death of the defendant would not abate the proceedings, since there was an application to implead two other defendants HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33350 RP No. 47 of 2026 4 as defendant Nos.2 and 3, being I.A.No.2 filed under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of the CPC, which was still pending adjudication. Reliance in this behalf is placed on an order dated 15.07.2016 passed by the learned Trial Court when notice was issued in this application. 4.2. The learned counsel for the review petitioners further submits that no doubt the petitioners were not diligent in pursuing the matter before the Trial Court, however, and on instructions, they submit that the petitioners would appear before the learned Trial Court on each day either in person or through an authorised representative. He further submits that the suit filed was for partition inter se the plaintiffs and the defendant, thus it would be in the interest of justice, if the order dated 07.01.2026 is recalled and the writ proceedings in W.P.No.15076/2021 be proceeded with. 5. This Court has examined the record. The suit was filed seeking partition of the suit schedule property and HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33350 RP No. 47 of 2026 5 allotment of 2/3rd share to the plaintiffs in O.S.No.416/ 2015. The plaintiffs/petitioners herein are the son and daughter of one Virupakshappa, who was the defendant. The plaintiffs/petitioners of the suit schedule property submit that they are also the co-owners. 6. During the pendency of the suit, I.A.No.2 was filed to implead the proposed defendant Nos.2 and 3 in the suit who are the subsequent purchasers of the property from the defendant. 7. In a partition suit, it is settled law that the plaintiffs are the defendants and the defendants are the plaintiffs. 8. Since the order under review was passed without this information being brought to the notice of the Court, this Court deems it apposite to recall the order of 07.01.2026 and to allow the review petition. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) The Review Petition is allowed; HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33350 RP No. 47 of 2026 6 (ii) The order dated 07.01.2026 is recalled. Writ Petition No.15076/2021 is restored to file; (iii) Issue notice to the respondents in Writ Petition No.15076/2021 returnable on 05.08.2026. Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE BMV* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29