- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010360252025 NC: 2026:KHC:46768 WP No. 17347 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 17347 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. BABU RAJENDRA PRASAD S/O K. BYRANNA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT NO. 31, YERAPPA INDUSTRIAL AREA CHANNANEHALLI, MAGADI ROAD BANGALORE – 562130. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARAVIND M NEGLUR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. VIJAYALAKSHMI W/O K BYRANNA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS R/AT MACHANAHALLI BELLINAKOTE POST SOMAPURA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562111. 2. SMT. SEETHALAKSHMI W/O RUDRE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS R/AT THIMMASANDRA MADURAI HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-560089. Digitally signed by DHANALAKSHMI MURTHY Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010360252025 NC: 2026:KHC:46768 WP No. 17347 of 2025 3. SMT. VISHALAKSHMI N. H W/O KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS R/AT ANJAN MOTORS, 8TH MAIN HESARAGHATTA MAIN ROAD BENGALURU-560088. 4. SHRI. DATTATREYA N.H. S/O N.V. HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/AT NAGARURU VILLAGE DASAPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK-562162. 5. SMT. MANGALA N H W/O SURESH N H AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT 2ND CROSS, MARUTHI NAGARA HARISHINAKUNTE, NELAMANAGLA TALUK BENGALURU-562123. 6. SHRI. SRINIVAS N.H. S/O N.V. HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS. 7. SHRI VIVEKANANDA N H S/O N.V. HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS R6 & R7 ARE R/AT NAGARURU VILLAGE DASAPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK-562162. 8. SMT. SHYLAJA N.H. W/O GOPALAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT NO. 83/84, KAMATH LAYOUT CHANNANAYAKAPALYA, NAGASANDRA POST BENGALURU-560073. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010360252025 NC: 2026:KHC:46768 WP No. 17347 of 2025 9. SMT. PADMA N.H. W/O CHIKKEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT AJJAHALLI VILLAGE KUDOOR HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-561101. 10. SMT. MANJULA N.H. W/O RAGHU AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT NAGARURU VILLAGE DASAPURA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK-562162. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA V., ADVOCATE FOR R1: NOTICE TO R2 TO R10 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED: 01.09.2025) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 15.02.2025 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., NELAMANGALA IN I.A NO. 2/2023 FILED IN FDP 42/2022 WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE H AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, by the impleading applicant in FDP No.42/2022, pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala (for short, ‘the FDP Court’), - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010360252025 NC: 2026:KHC:46768 WP No. 17347 of 2025 which is filed by mother of the petitioner herein, whereby, the application filed by the petitioner, for impleading, in the final decree proceedings, has been dismissed. 2. The respondent No.1 has filed a suit for partition and separate possession against her brothers and sisters. The suit came to be decreed. The respondent No.1 has filed F.D.P.No.42/2022 before the FDP Court. In the final decree proceedings, the petitioner has filed an application for impleading, on the ground that, he has right in the property. The FDP Court has rightly rejected the said application, giving the following reasons. The relevant paragraph is extracted below: “10. Further the applicant claiming to be the son of the petitioner has filed this IA No.II under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of CPC to permit him to come on record as respondent and it is the contention of the impleading applicant that the suit schedule properties are his ancestral properties which is acquired by his grandfather and the same is not denied by the petitioner, either she has denied her relationship with the applicant and also regarding - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010360252025 NC: 2026:KHC:46768 WP No. 17347 of 2025 the suit schedule properties, but it is pertinent to note that in order to claim property as ancestral it should be acquired by the male upto three generation continuously and to the case on hand the applicant is claiming his right through his mother and though his mother has inherited the suit schedule properties from her father, but the same does not partake character of ancestral properties in the hand of the applicant. Until his mother is alive, he cannot claim any share and for that reason the applicant is not a necessary party.” 3. There is no error or illegality in the order passed by the FDP Court. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 19