-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1145
WP No. 106681 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 106681 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
RAMAPPA S/O. KAREPPA JONGANAVAR,
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED GOVERNMENT SERVANT,
R/O. H.NO.3062, CHAWDI GALLI, MUDHOL ROAD,
JAMKHANDI-587301, TQ: JAMKHANDI,
DIST: BAGALKOT.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRASHANT S. KADADEVAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SAYYAD S/O. YOUNAS FAZIL,
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. S.S. PALYA, NERLEKERE,
CHITRADURGA-577501.
2. LAXMAN S/O. BASAPPA NYAMAGOUDA,
AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
GIRIJA A
BYAHATTI R/O. SHIRAGUPPAI-587119,
TQ: JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENTS
DHARWAD
BENCH (BY SRI. S.L. MATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1-HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE
OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON I.A. NO.8
DATED 15.10.2024 PASSED IN O.S. NO.138/2021 ON THE FILE OF
THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT: JAMKHANDI (ANNEXURE-
F) AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1145
WP No. 106681 of 2024
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the
following reliefs:
i. Issue writ in the nature of Certiorari by
quashing the impugned order on I.A. No.8
dated 15.10.2024 passed in O.S. No.138/2021
on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge
at: Jamkhandi (ANNEXURE-F).
ii. Issue any other writ or direction as deem fit
by this Hon’ble Court in the interest of justice
and equity.
2. The petitioner had filed a suit in O.S.No.138/2021, for
the cancellation of the sale deed in respect of the suit
property, as also for possession. In the said suit, in
the written statement, defendant No.2 had taken up a
contention that, one Mr. Vijayakumar Balamatti is also
a necessary party, and in his absence, the suit cannot
be effectively tried and decided.
3. Further, submissions have been made as regards the
relationship of Vijayakumar Balamatti with one
Mr.Abdul Mujeeb. It is in that background that,
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1145
WP No. 106681 of 2024
belatedly, the petitioner had filed I.A.No.8 to implead
the said Vijayakumar Balamatti, represented by his
GPA holder and the aforesaid Mr.Abdul Mujeeb, which
came to be objected to by defendant No.2 on the
ground that no reliefs have been sought for against
them and that, in order to create confusion, tagging a
transaction, which is not related to the present suit,
they were sought to be made parties.
4. The Trial Court, vide the impugned order dated
15.10.2024, rejected the application on the ground
that the matter being posted for final arguments, the
application has been filed belatedly to protract the
proceedings and as such, imposed a cost of ₹200/-.
Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this
Court.
5. The submission of Sri.Prashant S. Kadadevar, learned
counsel for the petitioner, is that it is by inadvertence
that the petitioner could not implead the said parties
earlier and also despite the averment being made in
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1145
WP No. 106681 of 2024
the written statement, though the matter is posted for
final arguments, this Court may allow the application
on terms, which the petitioner would adhere to and
comply with.
6. The submission of Sri. S. L. Matti, learned counsel for
respondent No.2/defendant No.2, again is that the
matter is being protracted and that an unrelated
transaction is sought to be brought on record, as
regards which the parties have already compromised
and which has attained finality.
7. Heard Sri. Prashant S. Kadadevar, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Sri. S. L. Matti, learned counsel for
respondent No.2. Perused the papers.
8. Though the matter is posted for final arguments, it
cannot be disputed that in the pleadings filed by
defendant No.2, there is specific averment made that
Mr.Vijayakumar Balamatti and Mr.Abdul Mujeeb are
related to the transaction, and there is specific
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1145
WP No. 106681 of 2024
averment made that, without Mr.Vijayakumar
Balamatti being made a party, the suit cannot be
decided effectively.
9. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered
opinion that the application would have to be allowed,
of course, by imposing suitable terms on the
petitioner.
10. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i. Writ petition is allowed.
ii. The order dated 15.10.2024 passed in
I.A.No.8 in O.S.No.138/2021 by the
Additional Senior Civil Judge, Jamkhandi, at
Annexure ‘F’ is set aside.
iii. Consequently, I.A.No.8 is allowed, subject
to the payment of cost of ₹5,000/- (Rupees
Five Thousand Only) to the Advocate
Clerks’ Association, High Court of
Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, within a period
of 10 days from today, i.e., on or before
04.02.2025.
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:1145
WP No. 106681 of 2024
iv. The Trial Court is directed to issue notice
on I.A.No.8 to the persons named therein
and thereafter proceed with the matter.
v. Needless to say that, any compromise
already entered into and having attained
finality as regards any other property will
not be subject matter of the suit.
vi. Submission of Sri.Prashant S. Kadadevar,
that he would cooperate with the Trial
Court for speedy disposal of the matter is
placed on record.
vii. If services were not got to be effected
within a reasonable time on the proposed
defendants, defendant No.2 could also be
permitted to take out hand summons on
the proposed defendants.
Sd/-
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
JUDGE
gab
CT-MCK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14
