- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010608132026 NC: 2026:KHC:52979 WP No. 27788 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 27788 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. NAYANAMMA S/O LATE K.V YOGANANDA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS 2. POOJA K.V D/O LATE K.V YOGANANDA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 3. RAGHAVENDRA S/O LATE K.V YOGANANDA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS ALL ARE R/O LIC OFFICE ROAD NEAR JAGANADHARA SCHOOL THAYAGARAJA NAGARA CHALLAKERE TOWN, CHITRADURGA -577501 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SIDDAPPA B. M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. G MAHABALESHWARAPPA, S/O G.PAMPANNA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, OCCUPATION PRINCIPAL Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010608132026 NC: 2026:KHC:52979 WP No. 27788 of 2026 2. G.M.RAVI S/O G.MAHABALESHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 3. G.M.KIRAN S/O G.MAHABALESHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/O P.U.COLLEGE, YEMMIGANUR, BELLARY DIST-583113 4. K.V.VEDAMURTHY S/O K.G.VEERANNA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 5. SHOBHA W/O T.J.NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 48 YEARS P.B.GANGADHARAIAH COMPOUND, B.H.ROAD, TUMKUR-572101 6. K.V.UMESH S/O K.G. VEERANNA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 46 YEARS, RESPONDENT No.4 AND 6 ARE R/O NEAR GNANADHARA SCHOOL, THYAGARAJANAGARA, CHALLAKERE TOWN-577522 7. SRI AVINASH S/O NAGENDRA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, DESIGNER IN T.T.P.TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD, BANGALORE PERMANENT RESIDENT AT HEAD POST OFFICE ROAD, THYAGARAJA NAGARA, CHALLAKERE TOWN-577522 8. V.NAGENDRA PRASAD, S/O K.G. VEERANNA, - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010608132026 NC: 2026:KHC:52979 WP No. 27788 of 2026 AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS BUSINESS MAN AND LORRY OWNER R/O HEAD POST OFFICE ROAD THYAGARAJA NAGARA, CHALLAKERE TOWN-577522 …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC IN OS NO.15/2012 I A NO.28 DATED 16.09.2025 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-F TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed impugning the order dated 16.09.2025, whereby I.A. No.28 filed under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘CPC’), came to be allowed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that, though the prayers in both the suits, namely, O.S. No.15/2012 and O.S. No.27/2006, are for partition and possession, and the properties involved in both the suits are common, the basis of the respective claims rests on different pleadings, which require independent adjudication. In that view - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010608132026 NC: 2026:KHC:52979 WP No. 27788 of 2026 of the matter, it is contended that the impugned order staying further proceedings in O.S. No.15/2012 is unsustainable. 3. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the parties. 4. O.S. No.27/2006 was instituted seeking partition and separate possession of the schedule properties. The present suit, namely, O.S. No.15/2012, is also filed seeking partition and separate possession, though the extent of the share claimed varies. 5. O.S. No.27/2006 came to be decreed, against which R.A. No.50/2010 was preferred. In the said appeal, the decree of the trial Court was set aside. The said matter is presently the subject matter of R.S.A. No.2211/2011 before this Court. 6. The trial Court, taking note of the fact that both the suits are between the same parties and seek substantially identical reliefs, and that the outcome of R.S.A. No.2211/2011 would have a bearing on the adjudication of O.S. No.15/2012, - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010608132026 NC: 2026:KHC:52979 WP No. 27788 of 2026 has ordered stay of further proceedings in O.S. No.15/2012 until the disposal of R.S.A. No.2211/2011. 7. A prima facie perusal of the pleadings, prayers and schedule properties in both the suits indicates that the finding and conclusion arrived at by the trial Court are justified. Undoubtedly, the share determination in RSA No. 2211/2011 would be of assistance and binding in deciding O.S. No. 15/2012. No infirmity is found in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24