SRI. SATHISH v. SMT. SHARADAMMA
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 07 Jan 2025
- Bench
- LALITHA KANNEGANTI
- Neutral citation
- 2025:KHC:312
Outcome
Allowed
(iii) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 24
- Constitution of India art. 227
Judgment
SRI. DINESH, S/O LATE T.C. KALASAPPA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
SMT. PADMAVATHI, W/O T.C. GOVINDE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
SRI. T.G. RAGAVENDRA, S/O T.C. GOVINDE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:312 WP No. 30363 of 2019
SRI. T.G. RAJENDRA GOWDA, S/O T.C. GOVINDE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 5 ARE R/OF ULAVALLI VILLAGE, THYAVANA POST, SRINGERI TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 139.
SMT. VISHALAKSHI, W/O KRISHNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/OF KABBINA MANNU, MAGUNDI VILLAGE AND POST, BALEHONNUR HOBLI, NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU.
SMT. SHRIMATHI, W/O RAVINDRA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O ULAVALLI VILLAGE, THYAVANA POST, SRINGERI TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 139.
SMT. SHRUTHI, D/O RAVINDRA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/Of TEKKUR VILLAGE & POST, SRINGERI TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 139.
SRI. NAGASHAYANA, S/O RAVINDRA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:312 WP No. 30363 of 2019
SRI. MADHUSUDANA, S/O RAVINDRA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, SL. NO. 9 AND 10 ARE R/O ULAVALLI VILLAGE, THYAVANA POST, SRINGERI TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 139.
SMT. SULOCHANA, W/O VASAPPA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O DONOOR, YADADALLI VILLAGE, KIGGA POST, SRINGERI TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 139.
SRI. T.C. CHANDRASHEKAR, S/O LATE CHINNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O ULAVALLI VILLAGE, THYAVANA POST, SRINGERI TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 139.
SMT. SHYLA, W/O LATE NAGARAJA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/OF GALMUDI, GANDAGATTA VILLAGE & POST SRINGERI TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 139.
SMT. SHRIDEVI, W/O DEVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/OF HONALLI, MAGUNDI VILLAGE AND POST, NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 139. …RESPONDENTS - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:312 WP No. 30363 of 2019 (BY SRI. C.G. GOPALASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R7 TO R10 AND R12; R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R11, R13 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; VIDE ORDER DATED 20.02.2020 SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R6 AND R4 HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN MISC.NO.59/2018 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSION AT CHIKKAMAGALURU AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed aggrieved by the orders passed in Misc.P.No.59/2018 dated 21.06.2019 on the file Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru, whereby the Court had rejected the request of the petitioner to transfer of O.S.No.19/2016 pending on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC at Sringeri to the Court of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at N.R.Pura - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:312 WP No. 30363 of 2019 Sitting at Sringeri and to try along with O.S.No.17/2018 and 18/2018.
2. The facts of the case are that both the petitioner and respondents are the lineal descendants of one late Chinne Gowda. Respondent Nos.7 to 10 filed a suit for declaration before the Senior Civil Judge and C.J.M. at Chikkamagaluru which was numbered as O.S.No.110/2014 seeking declaration that they are the absolute owners of the property on the basis of the Will executed by Sri Chinne Gowda. Later the suit transferred to the Court of Senior Civil Judge at N.R. Pura and re-numbered as O.S. No.17/2018 and on the same day respondent No.12 had filed O.S. No.111/2014 before the Senior Civil Judge and C.J.M. at Chikkamagaluru and that was also transferred to the Court of Senior Civil Judge at N.R. Pura and re-numbered as O.S. No.18/2018. Both the suits were clubbed together and a common evidence is let in. Thereafter, the petitioner herein had filed O.S. No.19/2016 against all the parties in the other suits along - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:312 WP No. 30363 of 2019 with other family members seeking partition and also a declaration that the earlier partition is not binding on him. The petitioner herein had filed petition under section 24 of the CPC before the Principal District and Sessions Judge at Chikkamagaluru seeking transfer of his suit i.e., O.S. No.19/2016 to the Court of Senior Civil Judge at N.R. Pura along with O.S.No.17/2018 O.S.No.18/2018. It came to be dismissed by the order impugned whereby the Court has observed that the other two suits of the year 2014 whereas the suit of the petitioner is of the year 2016. All the properties in the present suit filed by the petitioner are not the subject matter in the other two suits, as such, there is no necessity to transfer the pending suit filed by the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner is before this court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all disputes are between the family members and when all the parties are the parties in the other two suits, in that - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:312 WP No. 30363 of 2019 case, the Court ought to have transferred the same, but without considering all these aspects Court had dismissed the petition.
4. Respondent Nos.1 to 5 , 11 & 13 were served, no Advocate is engaged by them and notice to respondent Nos.6 and 14 is held sufficient.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.7 to 10 & 12 submits that their suits are the prior suits which are of the year 2014 and now the suit is at advanced stage and only with an intention to drag on the proceedings, the present application came to be filed. Learned counsel submits the petitioner could not make out any grounds for transfer of the case from the Junior Civil Judge, Sringeri to Senior Civil Judge at N.R. Pura and hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed.
6. Having heard the learned counsel on either side, perused the material on record. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:312 WP No. 30363 of 2019
Operative part
7. The undisputed facts are that some of the properties are common in the suit filed by the petitioner and other two pending suits. If these cases are dealt with by two different Courts, there is every possibility of conflicting of judgments. The reasoning that is given by the District Court in dismissing the application unsustainable. Looking at the interest of the parties and also to avoid conflicting of judgments, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following: ORDER (i) The impugned order dated 21.06.2019 passed in Misc.P.No.59/2018 by the Court of the Principal District and Sessions Judge at Chikkamagaluru is hereby set-aside. (ii) O.S.No.19/2016 pending on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Sringeri is withdrawn and transferred to the Court of the Senior Civil Judge at N.R. Pura Sitting at Sringeri to be - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:312 WP No. 30363 of 2019 along with O.S. No.17/2018 and O.S.No.18/2018. (iii) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. (iv) The petitioner shall not seek unnecessary adjournments and shall proceed with the matter. (v) All IAs. in the petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE KA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42 CT: BHK
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: (iii) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 24; Constitution of India — art. 227.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Karnataka High Court, on 07 Jan 2025. The bench was LALITHA KANNEGANTI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.