Karnataka High Court
Sri. T L Sreekanth vs Sri. D R Pradeep on 18 November, 2023
Author: S.G.Pandit
Bench: S.G.Pandit
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:41391
WP No. 25202 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 25202 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. T. L. SREEKANTH,
S/O LATE LAKSHMIPATHIYAPPA,
AGED 49 YEARS,
R/O NO.15, 10TH CROSS,
CHAMUNDESHWARI NAGAR,
LAGGERE, BANGALORE - 560 058.
2. SMT. T.L.LALITHA W/O GIRI,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/O NO.734, 14TH CROSS,
9TH MAIN, HMT LAYOUT,
NAGASANDRA POST,
BANGALORE - 560 073.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PAVAN KUMAR G., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed AND:
by A K
CHANDRIKA
1. SRI. D.R.PRADEEP,
Location: High
Court Of S/O LATE RAJASHEKAR,
Karnataka AGED 42 YEARS,
2. SMT. KAVITHA W/O D R PRADEEP,
AGED 32 YEARS,
RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 2
R/O DWARALU,
LAKSHMISAGARA POST,
KASABA HOBLI, VTC, SIRA RURAL,
TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 139.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.K.B.JAYALAKSHMI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 & R2)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:41391
WP No. 25202 of 2023
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 04/08/2023 IN G AND W.C10/2022 PASSED BY THE LXXV
ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE (CCH-76)
ON INTERIM APPLICATION (I.A NO. 1) UNDER ORDER I RULE 10(2)
OF THE CPC AS FOUND AT ANNEXURE - A AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioners, impleading applicants in G & W.C.No.10/2022 on the file of LXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH.76) are before this Court, aggrieved by order dated 04.08.2023, by which their application under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC') is rejected.
2. Heard Sri. Pavan Kumar.G., learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. K.B.Jayalakshmi, learned counsel for the caveator/respondent Nos.1 and 2.
3. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed G & W.C.No.10/2022 under Section 6 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, with a prayer to appoint the petitioners as Natural Guardians of minor child Master Kushal C.Shekar and seeking permission to manage or administer -3- NC: 2023:KHC:41391 WP No. 25202 of 2023 schedule item Nos.1 to 10 properties. The said properties belongs to one Sri. T.L.Girish and Smt.D.R.Savitha. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that T.L.Girish and D.R.Savitha are brother and sister-in-law of the proposed impleading applicants. The petitioners and T.L.Girish are the children of one late Lakshmipathiyappa. Sri. T.L.Girish during his life time, adopted Master Kushal C.Shekar. On the death of Sri. T.L.Girish, the present G & W.C.No.10/2022 is filed by the petitioners requesting the Court to appoint them as Natural Guardians of Master Kushal C.Shekar and seeking permission to manage schedule item Nos.1 to 10 properties. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that the petitioners have also filed O.S.No.2953/2022 with a prayer to declare registered adoption deed dated 20.10.2020 as null and void and also to declare that the plaintiffs therein i.e., petitioners herein have their right over the suit schedule properties as legal heirs of late T.L.Girish and late D.R.Savitha.
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:41391 WP No. 25202 of 2023
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the trial Court committed an error in rejecting impleading application under impugned order. He submits that the petitioners are the proper parties to the proceedings since they claim that they are brother and sister of late T.L.Girish. The petitioners herein seek permission to manage the schedule properties at item Nos.1 to 10. It is submitted that the properties mentioned in the schedule item Nos.1 to 10 are ancestral properties and petitioners have right over those properties. Therefore, the petitioners are proper parties and their presence in the proceedings would assist the Court in appreciating the dispute between the parties.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the caveator/respondents would support the order passed by the trial Court and would submit that unless the petitioners establish their right in pending O.S.No.2953/2022, the petitioners have no right and -5- NC: 2023:KHC:41391 WP No. 25202 of 2023 interest in the schedule properties. Therefore, they are not necessary and proper parties to the proceedings.
6. The proceedings in G & W.C.No.10/2022 is initiated by natural parents of Master Kushal C.Shekar on the death of adopted father and mother i.e., Sri. T.L.Girish and Smt.D.R.Savitha. Admittedly, suit is filed by the petitioners in O.S.No.2953/2022 for declaration of registered adoption deed as null and void and for declaration that the petitioners/proposed impleading applicants have right over the schedule properties.
7. The Court under Order I Rule 10 of CPC may at any stage of the proceedings, either upon or without application of either party and on such terms, as may appear to the Court to be just, order that the name of any party improperly joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, be struck out, and that the name of any person who ought to have been joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, or whose presence before the Court may be necessary in order to enable the Court effectually and completely to -6- NC: 2023:KHC:41391 WP No. 25202 of 2023 adjudicate all the questions involved in the suit, be added. The Rule would contemplate necessary and proper party. A necessary party is a person who ought to have been joined as a party and in whose absence, no effective decree could be passed. Proper party is a party who though not a necessary party is a person whose presence would enable the Court completely, effectively and adequately adjudicate upon all the matters in dispute in the suit.
8. In the case on hand, respondent Nos.1 and 2, petitioners in G & WC proceedings have prayed to appoint them as Natural Guardians of minor child Master Kushal C. Shekar and also sought permission to manage/administer as Natural Guardians of minor child Master Kushal C.Shekar in respect of the suit schedule item Nos.1 to 10 properties. Whether in terms of the provisions of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, the petitioners could be appointed as guardians or not is to be examined by the trial Court. If they fulfill the criteria for appointing them -7- NC: 2023:KHC:41391 WP No. 25202 of 2023 as guardians, then only the Court could appoint them as guardians. The petitioners-impleading applicants in the above said circumstances would not be necessary or proper parties to the G & WC proceedings. Moreover, in the suit filed by the petitioners in O.S.No.2953/2022, their rights have to be decided and if their prayer to declare registered adoption deed as null and void, then the petitioners could seek appropriate relief.
The trial Court is justified in rejecting the application filed under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of CPC. Accordingly, petition stands dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19