Karnataka High Court
Sri. K V Thammanna vs Sri. T Ramaiah on 1 December, 2020
Author: Krishna S.Dixit
Bench: Krishna S.Dixit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO.57286/2016(GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SRI. K V THAMMANNA
S/O LATE VENKATEGOWDA
AGED 66 YEARS,
R/O KALLIKUPPA MAJURA GADDUR VILALE,
ROBERTSONPET HOBLI
BANGARPET TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.M.B. CHANDHA CHORDA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. T. RAMAIAH
S/O THAMME GOWDA
AGED 81 YEARS
2. SMT. MUNIYAMMA
DEAD WITHOUT ANY OTHER LRS
EXCEPT DEFENDANTS 2 & 3
3. SMT.NARAYANAMMA
W/O T RAMAIAH
D/O LATE VENKATE GOWDA
AGED 74 YEARS
4. SRI SRINIVASA
S/O MUNIBYCHAPPA @ BYCHAPPA
AGED 62 YEARS
5 SRI JAYARAMA
S/O MUNIBYCHAPPA @ BYCHAPPA
AGED 59 YEARS
6. SRI ANANDAPPA
S/O MUNIBYCHAPPA @ BYCHAPPA
AGED 57 YEARS
2
RESPONDENTS 1 TO 6 ARE
R/O KALLIKUPPA MAJURA DADDUR VILLAGE,
ROBERTSONPET HOBLI,
BANGARPET TALUK,
KOLAR DISTRICT-563114.
7 SMT. SHANTHAMMA
W/O SRIRAMAPPA
D/O MUNIBYCHAPPA @ BYCHAPPA
AGED 66 YEARS,
R/O CHIKKA ANKANDAHALLI
KASABA HOBLI,
BANGARPET TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT-563114
8 SMT. RATHNAMMA
W/O LATE THAMMANNA
AGED 61 YEARS
9 SMT. HAMSAMMA
D/O LATE THAMMANNA
AGED 38 YEARS,
10 SRI MANJUNATH
S/O LATE THAMMANNA
AGED 34 YEARS,
RESPONDENTS 8 TO 10
ARE RESIDING AT BEHIND
GOVORNMENT JUNIOR COLLEGE,
PIPELINE, ROBERTSONOPET, KGF,
KOLAR DISTRICT.
11 SRI RAMAIAH
S/O BYCHAPPA
AGED 91 YEARS
12 SRI RAMACHANDRAPPA
S/O RAMAIAH
AGED 70 YEARS
RESPONDENTS 11 AND 12
RESIDENTS OF
KALLIKUPPA VILLAGE,
ROBERTSONPET HOBLI,
BANGARPET TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT-563114
3
13 . SMT.YESHODAMMA
W/O VENKATESHAPPA
D/O RAMAIAH
AGED 62 YEARS,
THONGAL VILLAGE
ROBERSONPET HOBLI,
BANARPET TALUK-563114
14 . SRI GOPALAKRISHNA
S/O RAMAIAH
AGED 62 YEARS,
R/O KALLIKUPPA VILLAGE,
ROBERTSONPET HOBLI
BANGARPET TALUK
KOLAR DISRICT-563114
15 . SMT. BYAMMA
W/O IRRAGAPPA
AGED 76 YEARS,
R/O DODDUR VILLAGE,
ROBERTSONPET HOBLI,
BANGARPET TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT-563114
... RESPONDENTS
(BY: SRI. K. VISHWANATHA., ADVOCATE FOR R-12 TO R-15,
NOTICE TO R-2 TO R-11 IS D/W, V.O. DTD 11/07/2018.
R-1(a) TO R-1(c) & R-1(e) to R-1(g) ARE SERVED AND
UNREPRESENTED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATD 04.11.2016 PASSED ON I.A.13 IN
O.S.13/2010 ON THE FILE OF SR. CIVIL JUDGE AND PRL.
JMFC AT KGF, VIDE ANNEX-G.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY THROUGH VIDEO
CONFERENCE, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
4
ORDER
The petitioner being the second defendant in a partition suit in O.S.No.13/2020 is knocking at the doors of Writ court for assailing the order dated 04.11.2016 a copy whereof is at Annexure-G whereby the learned Senior Civil Judge at KGF having favoured the application of the respondents filed under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC, 1908 has accorded leave to amend the Written Statement.
2. After service of notice, the contesting respondents having entered appearance through their counsel, resist the writ petition making submission in justification of the impugned order and the reasons on which the same has been entered.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court grants reprieve to the petitioner inasmuch as, admittedly the suit in O.S.No.13/2020 is sought to be withdrawn by the respondent-plaintiff by filing a Memo dated 20.06.2016; when the request for withdrawal of the suit was pending consideration, the learned judge of the Court below in all propriety ought to have deferred the consideration of subject application for amendment of the 5 Written Statement, as rightly contended by learned counsel for the petitioner.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition succeeds in part; impugned order is invalidated and the subject application for amendment is remitted back for consideration of the Court below afresh after a decision is taken on the memo filed by the plaintiff for withdrawing the suit.
All contentions of the parties are kept open. No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE Bsv