- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:617 WP No. 37930 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 37930 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. DR. MOHAMMED ZULFICAR HUSSAIN AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, S/O LATE. MOHAMMED IQBAL HUSAAIN, R/AT S-011 C BLOCK, ZED ENCLAVE, HOSUR MAIN ROAD, SINGASANDRA, ANEKAL, BENGALURU – 560 068. REPRASENTED BY GPA HOLDER MOHAMMED ZAKIR HUSSAIN, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT NO.469, RAZA MANZIL, SOWCAR STREET, PATANWADI, CHANNAPATANA – 562 160, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AMBAJI RAO NAJRE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF SECRETARY STATE OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANASOUDHA BENGALURU – 560 001 2. THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME STATE OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU – 560 001 3. THE PRINCIPAL POLICE TRAINING SCHOOL, SLIKFORM, CHANNAPATANA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT – 562 160 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NEELAKANTAPPA K., HCGP) Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:617 WP No. 37930 of 2025 THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 11.09.2025 PASED BIN INTERIM APPLICATION NO. V FILED UNDER ORDER I RULE 10 (2) R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC AS PER ANNX-E PASSED BY THE LEARNED ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT CHANNAPATNA IN OS NO. 454/2022 AND ETC., 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 plaintiff in O.S.No.454/2022 is directed against the impugned order dated 11.09.2025 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Channapatna (for short “the Trial Court”), whereby the application, I.A.No.5 filed by the petitioner- plaintiff under Order I Rule 10 CPC, seeking impleadment of additional defendant No.4 was rejected by the Trial Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner-plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit against the respondents-defendants for declaration, possession and permanent injunction and other reliefs, in relation to the suit schedule immovable properties. During the pendency of the said - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:617 WP No. 37930 of 2025 suit, the petitioner-plaintiff filed the instant application, I.A.No.5 seeking to implead the Principal, Central Sericulture Research Centre Silk form Channapatna Taluk, Vandaraguppe, Ramanagara District, as additional defendant No.4 to the suit. The said application having been opposed by the respondents-defendants, the Trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned order rejecting I.A.No.5, aggrieved by which the petitioner-plaintiff is before this Court by way of the present petition. 4. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the trial court failed to consider and appreciate that the proposed 4th defendant i.e., Principal, Central Sericulture Research Centre, Silk Farm, Channapatna taluk, Vandaraguppe, Ramanagara District, was both a proper and necessary party to the instant suit especially when necessary averments in this regard had been made by the petitioner – plaintiff in the Affidavit in support of their impleadment application I.A.No.5 in which, it was specifically averred that the khata in respect of the suit schedule property had been changed to the name of the proposed defendant by the Deputy Commissioner in R.A.No.82/2022-23, which is sufficient to come to the conclusion that in the present suit for declaration and permanent injunction - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:617 WP No. 37930 of 2025 and other reliefs in respect of suit schedule immovable property, the proposed defendant was to be impleaded for the purpose of adjudication of the issues in controversy between the parties and failure on the part of the Trial Court to appreciate this, has resulted in erroneous conclusion. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that the impugned order passed by the trial court deserves to be set aside and I.A.no.5 filed by the petitioner deserves to be allowed. 5. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 11.09.2025 passed on I.A.No.V in O.S.No.454/2022 by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Channapatna, is hereby set aside and I.A.No.5 filed by the petitioner is hereby allowed and the proposed defendant is directed to be impleaded as additional defendant No.4 to the suit. (iii) The petitioner – plaintiff shall amend the cause title to the plaint by impleading additional defendant No.4 and file amended plaint before the trial court, pursuant to which, the Trial Court shall issue suit - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:617 WP No. 37930 of 2025 summons / notice to the additional defendant No.4 and thereafter proceed further in accordance with law. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMC/SRL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 67