Karnataka High Court
Smt Janaki Krishnappa vs Smt.A.G.Manjula on 21 August, 2012
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A.S. Bopanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA
CIVIL PETITION NO.68/2012
C/W
CIVIL PETITION NOS. 131/2012, 132/2012,
133/2012, 134/2012 & 135/2012
C.P. NO. 68/2012
BETWEEN:
SMT. JANAKI KRISHNAPPA,
W/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052 ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI C.M. NAGABUSHANA, ADV.,)
AND:
SMT. A.G. MANJULA,
W/O. K. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 74/2, 1ST STAGE,
1ST PHASE, B.T.M. LAYOUT,
BANGALORE - 560 068 ... RESPONDENT
(BY M/S. C.V. NAGESH ASSTS. ADV.)
2
THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED U/S 24 OF CPC, PRAYING
TO WITHDRAW RA NO. 178/2011 AND RA NO. 179/2011 ON
THE FILE OF THE FAST TRACK COURT NO. 4 AND ALSO TO
WITHDRAW RA NOS. 171 TO 174/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE
RURAL DISTRICT AT BANGALORE AND TO TRANSFER THE
SAME TO THIS HON'BLE COURT AND TO CLUB THE SAID
APPEALS WITH RFA NO. 1201/2011 AND RFA NO. 1281/2011
PENDING ADJUDICATION BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT, IN
THE INTEREST OF THE JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
C.P. NO. 131/2012
BETWEEN:
SMT. JANAKI KRISHNAPPA,
W/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052 ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI C.M. NAGABUSHANA, ADV.,)
AND:
1. SRI. K. KRISHNAPPA,
S/O. LATE T.N. KUPPAINAIDU,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 74/2,
1ST STAGE, 1ST PHASE,
B.T.M. LAYOUT,
BANGALORE - 560 068
3
2. K. NANDA KUMAR,
S/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY M/S. C.V. NAGESH ASSTS. ADV. FOR R1,
SRI. P.S. MOHAN, ADV. FOR INDUS LAW FOR R2)
THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED U/S 24 OF CPC, PRAYING
TO WITHDRAW RA NO. 171/2011 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
PRL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL
DIST., BANGALORE AND TO TRANSFER THE SAME TO THIS
HON'BLE COURT TO CLUB THE SAME WITH RFA 1201/2011
PENDING ADJUDICATING BEFORE THE HON'BLE COURT TO
DISPOSE OF THE SAME ON MERITS TO AVOID CONFLICTING
DECISIONS OR DIVERGENT ORDERS AND ALLOW THE
PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
C.P. NO. 132/2012
BETWEEN:
SMT. JANAKI KRISHNAPPA,
W/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052 ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI C.M. NAGABUSHANA, ADV.,)
4
AND:
1. SRI. K. SRINIVAS,
S/O. K. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 74/2,
1ST STAGE, 1ST PHASE,
B.T.M. LAYOUT,
BANGALORE - 560 068
2. K. NANDA KUMAR,
S/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY M/S. C.V. NAGESH ASSTS. ADV. FOR R1,
SRI. P.S. MOHAN, ADV. FOR INDUS LAW FOR R2)
THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED U/S 24 OF CPC, PRAYING
TO WITHDRAW RA NO. 172/2011 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
PRL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL
DIST., BANGALORE AND TO TRANSFER THE SAME TO THIS
HON'BLE COURT TO CLUB THE SAME WITH RFA 1201/2011
PENDING ADJUDICATION BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT TO
DISPOSE OF THE SAME ON MERITS TO AVOID CONFLICTING
DECISIONS OR DIVERGENT ORDERS AND ALLOW THE
PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
C.P. NO. 133/2012
BETWEEN:
SMT. JANAKI KRISHNAPPA,
W/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
5
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052 ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI C.M. NAGABUSHANA, ADV.,)
AND:
1. SRI.K. VENKATESH,
S/O. K. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 74/2, 1ST STAGE,
1ST PHASE, B.T.M. LAYOUT,
BANGALORE - 560 068.
2. K. NANDA KUMAR,
S/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY M/S. C.V. NAGESH ASSTS. ADV. FOR R1,
SRI. P.S. MOHAN, ADV. FOR INDUS LAW FOR R2)
THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED U/S 24 OF CPC, PRAYING
TO WITHDRAW RA NO. 173/2011 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
PRL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL
DIST., BANGALORE AND TO TRANSFER THE SAME TO THIS
HON'BLE COURT TO CLUB THE SAME WITH RFA 1201/2011
AND RFA NO. 1281/2011 PENDING ADJUDICATION BEFORE
THIS HON'BLE COURT TO DISPOSE OF THE SAME ON
MERITS TO AVOID CONFLICTING DECISIONS OR
DIVERGENT ORDERS AND ALLOW THE PETITION IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
6
C.P. NO. 134/2012
BETWEEN:
SMT. JANAKI KRISHNAPPA,
W/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052 ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI C.M. NAGABUSHANA, ADV.,)
AND:
1. SMT. A.G. MANJULA,
W/O. K. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 74/2,
1ST STAGE, 1ST PHASE,
B.T.M. LAYOUT,
BANGALORE - 560 068.
2. K. NANDA KUMAR,
S/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY M/S. C.V. NAGESH ASSTS. ADV. FOR R1,
SRI. P.S. MOHAN, ADV. FOR INDUS LAW FOR R2)
THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED U/S 24 OF CPC, PRAYING
TO WITHDRAW RA NO. 174/2011 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
PRL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL
7
DIST., BANGALORE AND TO TRANSFER THE SAME TO THIS
HON'BLE COURT TO CLUB THE SAME WITH RFA 1201/2011
PENDING ADJUDICATION BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT TO
DISPOSE OF THE SAME ON MERITS TO AVOID CONFLICTING
DECISIONS OR DIVERGENT ORDERS AND ALLOW THE
PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
C.P. NO. 135/2012
BETWEEN:
SMT. JANAKI KRISHNAPPA,
W/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052 ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI C.M. NAGABUSHANA, ADV.,)
AND:
1. SRI. K. SRINIVAS,
S/O. K. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 74/2,
1ST STAGE, 1ST PHASE,
B.T.M. LAYOUT,
BANGALORE - 560 068
2. K. NANDA KUMAR,
S/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052
8
3. SMT. CHAYA,
D/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 545, 9TH CROSS,
J.P. NAGAR 3RD PHASE,
BANGALORE - 560 78
4. SMT. JYOTHSNA,
D/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 39,
PALACE ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052
5. SMT. LALANA,
D/O. LATE K.B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 1350,
4TH CROSS, 10TH MAIN,
JUDICIAL LAYOUT,
G.K.V.K. POST,
BANGALORE ... RESPONDENTS
(BY M/S. C.V. NAGESH ASSTS. ADV. FOR R1,
SRI. P.S. MOHAN, ADV. FOR INDUS LAW FOR R2)
THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED U/S 24 OF CPC, PRAYING
TO WITHDRAW RA NO. 179/2011 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
THE FAST TRACJ COURT FTC NO. 4, BANGALORE RURAL
DIST., BANGALORE AND TO TRANSFER THE SAME TO THIS
HON'BLE COURT TO CLUB THE SAME WITH RFA 1201/2011
AND RFA NO. 1281/2011 PENDING ADJUDICATION BEFORE
THIS HON'BLE COURT TO DISPOSE OF THE SAME ON
MERITS TO AVOID CONFLICTING DECISIONS OR
DIVERGENT ORDERS AND ALLOW THE PETITION IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
9
THESE CIVIL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
These Civil Petitions are filed by the petitioners under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking transfer of the respective appeals which are indicated in the prayer column to the Civil Petition from the Lower Appellate Court, so as to enable consideration of the same along with R.F.A. Nos. 1201/2011 and 1281/2011, which is pending before this Court.
2. Notice of the petition was ordered to the respondents and they have entered appearance. The learned counsel for the respondent no.1 in all these petitions has filed separate objection statement to the petition.
3. In the light of the averments made in the petition and the objection statement, I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
10
4. The fact, which is not in dispute is that four suits had been instituted seeking for the relief of injunction in O.S. Nos. 91 to 94 of 2009 and four other suits in O.S. Nos. 87 to 90 of 2009 was filed for the relief of specific performance. When the said eight suits were pending before the Trial Court, they were all considered in the same Court before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Nelamangala. In respect of all the eight suits, a common judgment dated 18.04.2011 was passed. The aggrieved parties therein were therefore to prefer the appeals against the judgment of the trial Court. In that regard, keeping in view the pecuniary jurisdiction, two of the appeals in R.F.A. Nos. 1201/2011 and 1281/2011 has been filed before this Court and the same is pending for consideration. Similarly, for the reasons of pecuniary jurisdiction and the subject matter being below Rs. 10 lakhs, two appeals in R.A. Nos. 178/2011 and 179/2011 are filed and is pending before the Fast Track Court-IV, Bangalore Rural District. The appeals in R.A. No. 171 to 174/2011 are pending before the Principal Rural District Judge, Bangalore. The instant petitions are filed before this Court seeking withdrawal of the said Regular First 11 Appeals pending before the Fast Track Court-IV, Bangalore Rural District and Principal Rural District Judge to this Court to consider the same along with R.F.A. Nos. 1201/2011 and 1281/2011, since the suits arising from the appeals were all considered together before the Court below and to avoid conflicting decision in the matter.
5. The 1st respondent in the objection statement has contended that the instant petitions are not maintainable and the appeals before the Lower Appellate Court are not liable to be withdrawn to be considered by this Court. In the objection statement, reference is also made to the nature of the suit, one set being for bare injunction and the other set being for specific performance and also that the parties are different in the suits. It is the further contention of the 1st respondent that they are to be considered as unconnected matters and the question of considering them together would not arise.
6. It is further contended by the respondents that since the Civil Courts Act provides appropriate pecuniary jurisdiction to the Court, the appeals have been accordingly instituted and therefore the 12 same is not liable to be transferred. One other contention, which has been putforth is that if the appeals, which are pending before the Lower Appellate Court is withdrawn to be considered by this Court as Regular First Appeal, the 1st respondent would be denied the benefit of Second Appeal to be filed before this Court. Hence, it is contended that the petitions are not liable to be accepted and that they should be dismissed.
7. Though, such contentions have been taken by the respondents with regard to the matter being unconnected to each other, I am of the opinion that the same need not be dealt in detail inasmuch as the very fact that the suits were all clubbed together and were considered and disposed of together and at that stage, the 1st respondent herein did not have any objection to consider the suits together, it has to be considered as they are all interconnected. Though, the plaintiffs were different, there were common defendants. Hence, the objection in that regard cannot be accepted.
8. Further, though the appeals before this Court and the 13 Lower Appellate Court have been filed keeping in view the pecuniary jurisdiction, in view of the provision contained in Section 19(1) of the Civil Courts Act, since two appeals are pending before this Court, in any event, the judgment to be passed by the Lower Appellate Court would be bound by the judgment that would be passed by this Court. If not considered together, a situation would be created where there can be likelihood of conflicting judgment. Further, since all the records and evidence are similar in all the cases and common to all, they would have to be considered together. The objection that a opportunity of Second Appeal would be lost also would not arise. In the instance case, since the Regular First Appeal under Section 96 would be exhaustive consideration but the Second Appeal under Section 100 would only be with regard to substantial question of law.
9. In the instant case, two appeals in R.F.A. Nos. 1201/2011 and 1281/2011 would be considered by this Court as Regular First Appeal. The appellants in the appeals before the Lower Appellate Court in any event would not be in a position to make out substantial question of law separately to avail the Second Appeal, when there 14 would be decision on the same subject. Therefore, keeping all these aspects in view, I am of the opinion that all the appeals need to be considered together to avoid conflicting decisions in the matter.
10. In that view, these petitions are allowed. The appeals pending in R.A. Nos. 178/2011 and 179/2011 before the Fast Track Court-IV, Bangalore Rural District and the appeals in R.A. Nos. 171 to 174 of 2011 pending before the Principal Rural District Judge, Bangalore is ordered to be withdrawn to this Court. The respective Lower Appellate Courts shall therefore transmit the papers to this Court.
11. The registry of this Court is directed to assign R.F.A. Nos. to the said appeals, on the papers being received by this Court. The said appeals shall thereafter be listed along with R.F.A. Nos. 1201/2011 and 1281/2011 before this Court. Parties to bear their own costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE ST