Karnataka High Court
Vatsala W/O Chandrashekhar Rajapure vs Savakka W/O Gurulingappa Rajapure on 12 February, 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL
WRIT PETITION NO.110656/2017 (GM)
BETWEEN :
1. VATSALA W/O CHANDRASHEKHAR RAJAPURE
AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: H/W & AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MALLAPURE PG (GHATAPRABHA)
TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.
2. MAHESH S/O CHANDRASHEKHAR RAJAPURE,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MALLAPURE PG (GHATAPRABHA)
TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.
3. SMT.PUSHPA W/O PARASHURAM HONAMANI,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: HONAMANI STREET HONAGA
POST HONAGA,
TAL & DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.
4. SMT.VANDANA W/O MARUTI HANIMANAL,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: H/W,
R/O: GADHINGLAJ,
DIST: KOLHAPUR-416012.
5. SATISH S/O CHANDRASHEKHAR RAJAPURE,
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MALLAPURE PG GHATAPRABHA
TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.
6. SMT.SANGEETA W/O RAVI HADAPAD,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: H/W,
R/O: AYYAPPA SWAMI NAGAR,
POST RAIBAG, TAL: RAIBAG,
DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.
... PETITIONERS
(By Sri. : SACHIN S MAGADUM, ADV. )
2
AND
1. SAVAKKA W/O GURULINGAPPA RAJAPURE
AGE: 71 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
R/O: MALLAPURE PG GHATAPRABHA
TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.
2. SMT.PARWATI W/O SADISHIV KATTIMANI
AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
R/O: MUDHOL NEAR GOKUL TALKIES,
MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE-587101.
3. SMT.SULOCHANA W/O VISHNU NARVEKAR
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
R/O: KURALI, NEAR BUS STAND,
TAL: CHIKODI,
DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.
4. SMT.DHANAVANTI W/O SHANKAR RAJAPURE,
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE,
R/O: MALLAPUR PG (GHATAPRABHA)
NEAR CATTLE MARKET,
TAL: GOKAK,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
5. JAGADISH S/O SHANKAR RAJAPURE
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MALLAPUR PG (GHATAPRABHA)
NEAR CATTLE MARKET,
TAL: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.
6. NANDISH S/O SHANKAR RAJAPURE
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MALLAPUR PG (GHATAPRABHA)
NEAR CATTLE MARKET,
TAL: GOKAK,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
7. SHILPA S/O NEELKANT RAJAPURE
AFTER MARRIAGE CALLED AS
SHILPA W/O RAKESH MADHAPURE,
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O: BASHAL MISSION COMPUND,
3
BANGALE ONI, KARWAR ROAD,
HUBBALLI-580020.
8. SHIRIL @ CRYIL S/O NEELKANTH RAJAPURE
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE,
R/O: BASHAL MISSION COMPOUND,
BANGALE ONI, KARWAR ROAD,
HUBBALLI-580020.
9. RAMCHANDRA S/O SHIVALINGAPPA RAJAPURE
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MALLAPURE PG (GHATAPRABHA)
NEAR CATTELE MARKET,
TAL: GOKAK,
DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.
... RESPONDENTS
(By Sri : G B NAIK & SMT P G NAIK, ADV.)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED 03.10.2017 PASSED IN MISC.APPEAL NO.98/2015
ON THBE FILE OF XII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, BELAGAVI SITTING AT GOKAK VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30.09.2015 PASSED ON CIVIL
MISC.16/2011 ON THE FILE OF PRI.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
GOKAK VIDE ANNEXURE-E.
THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The present writ petition has been filed for writ of certiorari and to quash the impugned order dated 03.10.2017 passed in Misc. Appeal No.98/2015 on the file of XII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi sitting at Gokak vide Annexure-G and impugned order dated 30.09.2015 passed in Civil Misc.No.16/2011 on the file of 4 Principal Senior Civil Judge Gokak vide Annexure -E to meet the ends of justice and equity.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. P.G. Naik for respondent Nos.1 and 2- Caveator.
3. It is the contention of the petitioners that the father of the petitioners, who arrayed as defendant No.1 was placed exparte in O.S.No.143/1999. Respondents knowing fully well that he is survived by petitioners as Class-I heirs proceeded with the suit without bringing the present petitioners on record and made to attempt to get their names mutated to the concerned records. The present petitioners after coming to know about the Ex-parte decree have filed Miscellaneous Application under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC in Civil Misc.No.16/2011 and the same was rejected. Being aggrieved by the said order Misc. Appeal was preferred and the same was also dismissed by confirming the order of the Trial court. Against the said order, the present writ petition has been filed.
5
4. On perusal of the records and after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, he submits that with a liberty to challenge the judgment and decree passed by the Trial court in O.S.No.143/1999, the present writ petition may be disposed of.
5. The learned counsel for respondents -Caveator submits that the legal heirs of defendant No.1- the present petitioners are already contesting final decree proceeding by impleading themselves as party and it is in the final stage. The said submission is placed on record with a liberty to the petitioners to challenge the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.143/1999 before appropriate Court in accordance with law, if he is advised to do so. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed.
Sd/-
JUDGE MNS/-