- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1645 WP No. 37073 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 37073 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. VENKATAPPA SON OF LATE DODDAGALAIAH. AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.8, NEAR KABBALAMMA TEMPLE, H.GOLLAHALLI, VILLAGE, VIDYAPEETA POST, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 060. 2. SRI.BEERAIAH, SON OF LATE DODDAGALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, RESIDING AT H.GOLLAHALLI VILLAGE, VIDYAPEETA POST, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 060. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. FAYAZ SAB B G, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI HONNAPPA SINCE DAD BY LRS 1. SMT.MALLAMMA WIFE OF LATE HONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT B K HALLI VILLAGE NAGALAMADIKE HOBLI PAVAGADA TALUK 561 202. TUMKURU DISTTRICT. Digitally signed by MADHURI S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1645 WP No. 37073 of 2025 SRI BEERAIAH H SINCE DEAD BY LRS 2. SMT DEVAMMA WIFE OF LATE BEERAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 3. SRI ARUN KUMAR B SON OF LATE BEERAIAH. AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS. 4. SRI YUVARAJ B SON OF LATE BEERAIAH. AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS. ALL ARE RESIDING AT H.GOLLAHALLI, VIDYAPEETA POST, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 060. SRI. VENKATACHALA.H WIFE OF LATE VENKATACHALA.H AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. 5. SMT.LAKSHMI H WIFE OF LATE VENKATACHALA H AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 6. PAVAN V SON OF LATE VENKATACHALA H AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS. 7. SRI BEERESH V SON OF LATE VENKATACHALA H AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT H.GOLLAHALLI VIDYAPEETA POST, KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 060. 8. SRI HANUMAIAH H SON OF LATE HONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1645 WP No. 37073 of 2025 9. SRI CHANRA H SON OF LATE HONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 10. SMT SOWBHAGYA DAUGHTER OF LATE HONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT H.GOLLAHALLI VIDYAPEETA POST KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 060. SRI HANUMAIAH SINCE DEAD BY LRS 11. SMT KEMPAMMA WIFE OF LATE HANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 12. SMT RANGAMMA WIFE OF LATE HANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 13. SMT HONNAMMA H D/O OF LATE HANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS 14. SRI BERAIAH H WIFE OF LATE HANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT H. GOLLAHALLI VIDYAPEETA POST, KENGERI HOBLI BENGLAURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 060. SRI VENKATAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LRS 15. SMT HULLURAMMA WIFE OF LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1645 WP No. 37073 of 2025 16. SMT VARALAKSHMI DAUGHTER OF LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDING AT SIDDAYYANNA PALYA BYALAKERE POST, SOLUR HOBLI MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT -562 120. 17. SMT DEVAMMA D/O LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 18. SMT JANAKAMMA D/O LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 19. SRI BEERAIAH SON OF LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 20. SRI BASAVARAJU S/O LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 21. SRI RAMAKRISHNA SON OF LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 22. SMT BHAGYA D/O LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R-17 TO R-22 RESIDING AT: MARALAGUNDLU GRAMA MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT – 562 120. ALSO AT: RESIDING AT: H. GOLLAHALLI, CHOWDANAPURA POST,KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 060. 23. SRI HANUMAIAH S/O AJJANNA AGED MAJOR - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1645 WP No. 37073 of 2025 SRI. THIMMANNA SINCE DEAD BY LRS 24. SRI. RAJANNA S/O LATE THIMMANNA AGED AOBUT 40 YEARS 25. SMT HANUMAKKA D/O LATE THIMMANNA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 26. SMT JAYALAKSHMI SON OF LATE THIMMANNA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS ALL ARE H GOLLAHALLI VIDYAPEETA POST KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 060. 27. SRI LAKKAIAH S/O THIMMANNA AGE MAJOR. 28. SRI HANUMAIAH S/O THIMMANNA AGE MAJOR. ALL RE RESIDING AT : H. GOLLAHALLI VIDYAPEETA POST, KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 060. SMT HANUMAKKA SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS 29. SMT LAKSHMAMMA D/O HANUMAKKA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS H GOLLAHALLI VIDYAPEETA POST KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 060. 30. SMT HONNAMMA D/O LATE HANUMAKKA WIFE OF SRINIVASMURTHY AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT NO. 114 PURAVANINAGAR BYNEGANAHALI OLD MADRA ROAD BENGALURU – 560 016. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1645 WP No. 37073 of 2025 31. SRI. SRINIVAS S/O LATE HANUMAKKA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT H.GOLLAHALLI VIDYAPEETA POST, KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 060. 32. SRI. ANJINAPPA S/O LATE HANUMAKKA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS RESIDING AT H.GOLLAHALLI VIDYAPEETA POST, KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 060. 33. SRI. SHIVARAJ S/O LATE HANUMAKKA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS RESIDING AT H.GOLLAHALLI VIDYAPEETA POST, KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 060. 34. SRI.JAYARAM S/O LATE HANUMAKKA AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS. RESIDING AT H.GOLLAHALLI VIDYAPEETA POST, KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 060. …RESPONDENTS THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE CASE OF THE PETITIONERS AND TO GRANT THE FOLLOWING RELIEF(S) AND ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, TO, SET-SIDE AN IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 03.11.2025 PASSED IN I.A.NO.23 FILED UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10(2) OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 FOR IMPLEADING AS DEFENDANT NO.7 AND 8 IN O.S.NO. 766/2007 ON THE FILE OF ON THE FILE OF VII ADDL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, WHICH IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1645 WP No. 37073 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER This petition by the impleading applicants in I.A.No.23 filed in OS No.766/2007 is directed against the impugned order dated 03.11.2025 whereby the said application filed by the petitioners was dismissed by the Trial Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondent Nos.1 to 14 instituted a suit against the remaining respondents – defendants for partition and separate possession of their alleged share in the suit schedule immovable properties. The said suit having been contested by the defendants, the petitioners filed the instant application – I.A.No.23 under Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC seeking impleadment that they have filed two more suits in OS No.355/2022 and OS No.1818/2022 for declaration, partition and other reliefs. It was contended that the subject matter of OS No.355/2022 and the subject matter of the present suit in OS - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1645 WP No. 37073 of 2025 No.766/2007 are one and the same and as such, the petitioners were proper and necessary parties to the present suit also. The said application having been opposed by the respondents, the Trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned order dismissing the application only on the ground that the relationship between the parties has not been established by the petitioners. Aggrieved by the impugned order rejecting IA No.23, the petitioners are before this Court by way of the present petition. 4. Though several contentions have been urged by the petitioners in support of their claim, having regard to the undisputed fact that the petitioners have not been impleaded as parties to the instant suit in O.S.No.766/2007 and the relationship of the petitioners with the parties in OS No.766/2007 and their family members has been seriously disputed by the respondents, who opposed the impleadment application, the petitioners having already instituted two more suits in OS No.355/2022 and OS No.1818/2022, cannot be permitted to seek impleadment in the present suit since it would be open for them to put-forth their rights, claims and contentions in the said suits. It is needless to state that so long as the petitioners are not parties to the present suit in OS - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1645 WP No. 37073 of 2025 No.766/2007, any judgment, order, decree including the findings recorded by the Trial Court while rejecting IA No.23 would clearly not be binding upon the petitioners nor affect their rights, contentions, claims, etc., over the suit schedule properties involved in the present suit. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that non-impleadment of the petitioners in the present suit in O.S.No.766/2007 would not cause any prejudice to the petitioners and the impugned order cannot be said to suffer from any illegality or infirmity warranting interference by this Court in the present petition. Hence, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition without interfering with the impugned order and by issuing certain directions. 5. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby disposed of without interfering with the impugned order. (ii) Any judgment, order, decree, etc., or the findings recorded on IA No.23 would not affect the rights or contentions of the petitioners nor the same would be binding - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1645 WP No. 37073 of 2025 upon the petitioners or affect their rights in OS No.355/2022 and OS No.1818/2022. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30