- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4737 WP No. 27881 of 2025 C/W WP No. 20057 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 27881 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 20057 OF 2023 (GM-CPC) IN W.P NO. 27881/2025: BETWEEN: SRI. H.P. SURYANANARAYANACHARI S/O LATE PRASANNA CHARI, DEAD BY LRS. 1. SMT. SUGUNAMBA ALIAS SUGUNA, W/O LATE H.P. SURYANARAYANA CHARI, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 2. H.S. SOMU, S/O LATE H.P. SURYANARAYANA CHARI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. ALL ARE R/O NO.179/2, HOODI VILLAGE, GRAPHITE INDIA ROAD, BEHIND KAMATH HOTEL, BANGALORE-560 048. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NATARAJU T., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. H.M. RAMACHANDRA SHETTY, S/O LATE R. MUNISWAMY SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4737 WP No. 27881 of 2025 C/W WP No. 20057 of 2023 2. H.M. THYAGARAJA SHETTY, S/O LATE R. MUNISWAMY SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT MUNISWAMY SETTY COLONY, NEAR VINAYAKA TEMPLE, HOODI VILLAGE, MAHADEVAPURA POST, BENGALURU-560 048. 3. DWARAKAMAYI HOUSING PROJECTS PVT. LTD., HAVING ITS OFFICE AT FLAT NO. 402, SAROJ AQUILA, 'A' BLOCK, SRINIVASAREDDY LAYOUT, MARATHHALLI, BENGALURU-560 037. REGISTERED UNDER REAL ESTATE ACT, 2016 ALSO AT NO. 71, 7TH CROSS, RAJESHREE LAYOUT, MUNEKOLALA, MARATHAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 037. REPTD. BY ITS PARTNER MUSUNURI KISHORE 4. H.M. ADINARAYANA SHETTY S/O LATE R. MUNISWAMY SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/AT NO. 1037, MASJID ROAD, HOODI BUS STAND, MAHADEVAPURA POST, BENGALURU-560 048. 5. SHASHIKUMAR H.L. S/O LAKSHMINARAYANA SETTY, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT NO.16, 1ST CROSS, HOODI VILLAGE, K.R. PURAM HOBLI, BENGALURU-560 048. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4737 WP No. 27881 of 2025 C/W WP No. 20057 of 2023 6. H.L. RAJESH S/O LATE H.M. LAKSHMINARAYANA SETTY, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT MUNISWAMYSETTY LAYOUT, NEAR VINAYAKA TEMPLE, HOODI, MAHADEVAPURA (POST) VILLAGE, K.R. PURAM HOBLI, BENGALURU-560048 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. SRINIVASA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.08.2025 IN O.S.NO.9222/2014 PASSED BY THE LI ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE C/C. XXXVII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-38) ON I.A.NO.1/2025 UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10 R/W SEC. 151 CPC, VIDE ANNEXURE-P. IN W.P NO. 20057/2023 BETWEEN: SRI. H.P. SURYANARAYANACHARI S/O LATE PRASANNA CHARI DEAD BY LRS., 1. SMT. SUGUNAMBA, W/O LATE H.P. SURYANARAYANA CHARI AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 2. H.S MANJU S/O LATE H.P. SURYANARAYANA CHARI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 3. H.S. SOMU S/O LATE H.P. SURYANARAYANA CHARI AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS ALL ARE R/O NO.179/2 HOODI VILLAGE - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4737 WP No. 27881 of 2025 C/W WP No. 20057 of 2023 GRAPHITE INDIA ROAD BEHIND KAMATH HOTEL BANGALORE-560048 ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. NATARAJU T., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. H.M. RAMACHANDRA SHETTY S/O LATE R. MUNISWAMY SHETTY AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS 2. H.M. THYAGARAJA SHETTY S/O LATE R. MUNISWAMY SHETTY AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT MUNISWAMY SETTY COLONY NEAR VINAYAKA TEMPLE HOODI VILLAGE MAHADEVAPURA POST BENGALURU-560048 3. DWARAKAMAYI HOUSING PROJECTS PVT. LTD., HAVING ITS OFFICE AT FLAT NO.402 SAROJ AQUILA, 'A' BLOCK SRINIVASAREDDY LAYOUT MARATHHALLI BENGALURU-560 037 ALSO AT NO.71, 7TH CROSS RAJESHREE LAYOUT MUNEKOLALA, MARATHAHALLI BENGALURU-560 037 REPTD. BY ITS PARTNER MUSUNURI KISHORE 4. H.M. ADINARAYANA SHETTY S/O LATE R. MUNISWAMY SHETTY AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT NO.1037, MASJID ROAD HOODI BUS STAND, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4737 WP No. 27881 of 2025 C/W WP No. 20057 of 2023 MAHADEVAPURA POST, BENGALURU-560 048 5. SHASHIKUMAR H.L. S/O LAKSHMINARAYANA SETTY AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT NO.16, 1ST CROSS HOODI VILLAGE K.R. PURAM HOBLI BENGALURU-560 048 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. SRINIVASA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4; NOTICE/S IS/ARE SERVED ON RESPONDENT NOS.1, 2, 3 AND 5) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.08.2023 IN O.S.NO.9222/2014 PASSED BY THE XXXVII ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-38) ON I.A NO.2 UNDER ORDER I RULE 10 READ WITH SECTION 151 CPC, VIDE ANNEXURE-J. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER Both these petitions arise out of the suit in O.S. No.9222/2014 on the file of the learned LI Additional City Civil and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4737 WP No. 27881 of 2025 C/W WP No. 20057 of 2023 Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, concurrent charge XXXVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent No.4 and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the plaintiffs instituted the aforesaid suit against the defendants for mandatory injunction and permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule ‘B’ immovable property. The said suit is being contested by the defendants. 4. During the pendency of the suit, Sri H.M. Adinarayana Setty and Sri Shashikumar H.L claiming to be the family members of the plaintiffs filed an application seeking impleadment as additional defendant Nos.3 and 4 in the suit. The said application was allowed by the Trial Court vide order dated 24.09.2021. The said order allowing Sri H.M. Adinarayana Setty and Sri Shashikumar H.L to be impleaded as additional defendant Nos.3 and 4 in the suit has attained finality and become conclusive and binding upon all the parties including the plaintiffs and defendant - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4737 WP No. 27881 of 2025 C/W WP No. 20057 of 2023 Nos.1 and 2. Subsequently, one Sri H.L. Rajesh sought impleadment as defendant No.5 in the suit which was allowed vide order dated 16.08.2025. 5. Meanwhile, the application filed by defendant No.3 to transpose himself as additional plaintiff No.3 in the suit was allowed by the Trial Court vide order dated 22.08.2023. Aggrieved by the impugned orders permitting impleadment of defendant No.5 and transposing of defendant No.3 as plaintiff No.3 in the suit, the petitioners are before this Court by way of the present petitions. 6. A perusal of the material on record would clearly indicate that the Trial Court has come to the correct conclusion that the impleaded defendant Nos.3 to 5 were both proper and necessary parties to the suit especially when all of them were none other than the family members of the plaintiff Nos.1 and 2. In fact, the petitioners / defendant Nos.1(a) to 1(c) in their written statement itself had pointed out that the defendant Nos.3 to 5 had not been impleaded as parties to the suit as can be seen from the written statement filed by the petitioners. Under these circumstances, in the light of the undisputed fact that the impleaded defendant Nos.3 to 5 are none other than the family members of - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4737 WP No. 27881 of 2025 C/W WP No. 20057 of 2023 the plaintiffs coupled with the fact that the plaintiffs themselves had stated that they had no objection for the defendant Nos.3 to 5 to be impleaded to the suit, I am of the considered opinion that it cannot be said that any prejudice would be caused to the petitioners - defendant Nos.1(a) to 1(c) if impleadment of defendant Nos.3 to 5 was allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 16.08.2025 passed by the Trial Court permitting impleadment cannot be said to suffer from the illegality or infirmity nor can the same be said to have occasioned failure of justice warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as held by the Apex Court in the case of Radhey Shyam and Ors v. Chhabi Nath and Ors. [(2015) 5 SCC 423], K.P.Natarajan and Ors. vs. Muthalammal and Ors. [AIR 2021 SC 3443] and Mohamed Ali v. V.Jaya and others [(2022) 10 SCC 477]. 7. In so far as the impugned order passed by the Trial Court permitting the defendant No.3 to be transposed as additional plaintiff No.3 is concerned, as stated supra, the impleaded defendant No.3 is none other than the family member of plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 and in the absence of any conflict between plaintiff - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4737 WP No. 27881 of 2025 C/W WP No. 20057 of 2023 Nos.1 and 2 and defendant No.3 as borne out from the material on record, I am of the view that the Trial Court was fully justified in permitting transposition of defendant No.3 as plaintiff No.3 in the suit by passing the impugned order which also does not warrant interference by this Court. 8. In so far as the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the claim of the defendant Nos.3 to 5 and the transposed plaintiff No.3 (original defendant No.3) was barred by limitation is concerned, it is needless to state that the impleadment of the defendant Nos.3 to 5 and the transposition of defendant No.3 from the rank/status of defendant No.3 to the rank/status of plaintiff No.3 shall not relate back to the date of the suit but shall be reckoned/considered from the date of filing the applications for impleading and transposition and the question of limitation is left open to be decided by the Trial Court and all rival contentions between the parties as regards limitation in so far as defendant Nos.3 to 5 / transposed plaintiff No.3 would have to be kept open to be decided by the Trial Court at the time of final disposal of the suit. 9. In the result, I pass the following: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4737 WP No. 27881 of 2025 C/W WP No. 20057 of 2023 ORDER i). Both W.P. No.27881/2025 and W.P. No.20057/2023 are disposed of without interfering with the impugned orders. ii). It is however made clear that the impleadment of defendant Nos.3 to 5 and the transposition of defendant No.3 to the rank of the plaintiff No.3 shall not relate back to the date of the suit but shall be reckoned / considered from the date of such impleadment and transposition. iii). All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter including limitation are kept open to be decided by the Trial Court in accordance with law. iv). Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioners / defendant Nos.1(a) to 1(c) to file pleadings / rejoinder / reply etc. to the pleadings put forth by the additional defendant Nos.3 to 5 / transposed plaintiff No.3 and the Trial Court shall consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4737 WP No. 27881 of 2025 C/W WP No. 20057 of 2023 v). All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the merits / demerits of the rival contentions. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SMA/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7