- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010519412022 NC: 2026:KHC:38871 W.P. No.22605/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.22605/2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. KAVALKUNTE GEETHA BHAVANI AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS WIFE OF KAITKA REDDY RESIDING AT NO.185/91/01 BILLAMARNAHALLI VILLAGE JALA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT-562 157. 2. SMT. LAKSHMI DEVI AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS WIFE OF DR. MAHESHWARA REDDY RESIDING AT FLAT NO.404 MODEL APARTMENT HOUSE GAYATRI ESTATE, KURNOOL ANDHRA PRADESH-518 002. 3. SMT. N. PADMAVATHI AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS WIFE OF D. MOHAN KUMAR RESIDING AT 771 PAWANASTHA, 7TH A CROSS A SECTOR, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN BANGALORE-560 064. 4. SRI. D. MOHAN KUMAR AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS SON OF C.H. KONDANNA RESIDING AT 771, PAWANASTHA 7TH A CROSS, A SECTOR Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010519412022 NC: 2026:KHC:38871 W.P. No.22605/2022 YELAHANKA NEW TOWN BANGALORE-560 064. 5. SRI. N. SURESH KUMAR REDDY AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS SON OF N. VEMA REDDY C/O C. SIVASANKAR REDDY SHREE HOMES ELEGANCE FLAT NO. 102, 5TH A CROSS, SUNDER RAM SHETTY NAGARA BANNERGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE-560076. 6. SRI. T. KRISHNAMOHAN REDDY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS SON OF T. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY RESIDING AT 2-21, MADDANUR ROAD JAMMLAMADUGU, CUDDAPPA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH-516 434. 7. SRI. CHITTAMURU VENKATASUBBA REDDY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS SON OF RAMANA REDDY RESIDING AT NO.9/56 PANTA STREET, ATMAKUR NELLORE DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH-520 322. 8. SRI. CHUKKALURU VASUDEVA REDDY AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS SON OF C. PADDI REDDY RESIDING AT NO. 13-6-460/84 SHIV BAGH MAHESH NAGAR GUDI MALKAPUR HYDERABAD-560 067. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. M.N. UMESH, ADV., FOR SRI. NARASIMHA PRASAD S.D. ADV.,) - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010519412022 NC: 2026:KHC:38871 W.P. No.22605/2022 AND: 1. SRI. N.A. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS S/O K.N. ASHWATHAN R/AT NO.10/54, MOODALAPPA CROSS DODDAMAVALLI, BENGALURU-560004. 2. SMT. MUNIYAMMA @ SHEEKALAMMA MAJOR IN AGE W/O KOMAIAH. 3. SRI. B.M. MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O MUNIYAPPA. BOTH ARE R/AT NO.67 BILMARANAHALLI BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU-562 157. 4. SMT. CHUKKALURU BHARATHI AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS WIFE OF C. PAPI REDDY C/O C. SURYANARAYANA REDDY DOOR NO.13/442-2 AMAHA BHAVANI STREET TADIPATRI, ANDHRA PRADESH-515 411. 5. SRI. LAKONDA NAGAPRASADA RAO AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O NARAYANA RAO R/AT NO.1476 LANE NO.13 STREET NO. 14, NAGARJUNA NAGAR TARNAKA, SECUNDRABAD-500 017. …RESPONDENTS (V/O/DTD:17.11.2022, NOTICE TO R4 & R5 IS D/W R2, R3 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED V/O/DTD:16.07.2026, R1 IS H/S) - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010519412022 NC: 2026:KHC:38871 W.P. No.22605/2022 THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 01.10.2022, PASSED ON INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2 FILED UNDER ORDER I RULE 10(2) OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, BY THE PETITIONERS AND R-4 AND 5 HEREIN, IN O.S.NO.1021/2012, PENDING BEFORE THE HON’BLE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT DEVANAHALLI AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAME (VIDE ANNX-A HEREIN) & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, 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 01.10.2022 passed in O.S.No.1021/2012 by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahallil (for short, ‘the Trial Court’). - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010519412022 NC: 2026:KHC:38871 W.P. No.22605/2022 2. Heard Sri.M.N.Umesh, learned counsel appearing for Sri.Narasimha Prasad S.D., learned counsel for the petitioners. 3. Though notice is served on the respondents, there is no representation. 4. The respondent No.1 herein had filed O.S.No.1021/2012 against the respondent Nos.2 and 3 seeking the relief of specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 09.08.2003. In the said suit, the petitioners herein have filed an application under Order I Rule 10(2) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘the CPC’) seeking for impleadment. The Trial Court, under the impugned order rejected the said application. It is to be noticed that the petitioners herein are claiming to be the purchasers of the suit schedule property of which specific performance is sought. Hence, in my considered view, the petitioners are the proper and necessary parties to the aforesaid suit. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010519412022 NC: 2026:KHC:38871 W.P. No.22605/2022 5. It is also pointed out that the very petitioners have sought impleadment in O.S.No.351/2011 against the very same respondents which was rejected by the Trial Court and this Court, in W.P.No.22568/2022 vide order dated 30.01.2026 allowed the impleadment. Considering the reasons assigned by the Co-ordinate Bench in the aforesaid decision and also taking note of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of KASTURI Vs. IYYAMPERUMAL1, I am of the view that the Trial Court has committed a grave error in rejecting the application. 6. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 01.10.2022 passed in O.S.No.1021/2012 by the Principal Civil 1 (2005) 6 SCC 733 - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010519412022 NC: 2026:KHC:38871 W.P. No.22605/2022 Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli, is set aside. Consequently, the application of the petitioners filed under Order I Rule 10(2) of the CPC, is allowed. No order as to costs. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2