Karnataka High Court
WP/27788/2026 of NAYANAMMA Vs G MAHABALESHWARAPPA on 24 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010608132026 NC: 2026:KHC:52979 WP No. 27788 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 27788 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. NAYANAMMA S/O LATE K.V YOGANANDA AGED ABOUT
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
WRIT PETITION NO. 27788 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1.
NAYANAMMA
S/O LATE K.V YOGANANDA
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
2.
POOJA K.V
D/O LATE K.V YOGANANDA
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
3.
RAGHAVENDRA
S/O LATE K.V YOGANANDA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
ALL ARE R/O LIC OFFICE ROAD
NEAR JAGANADHARA SCHOOL
THAYAGARAJA NAGARA
CHALLAKERE TOWN,
CHITRADURGA -577501
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SIDDAPPA B. M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
G MAHABALESHWARAPPA,
S/O G.PAMPANNA,
OCCUPATION PRINCIPAL
Digitally
signed by
VINUTHA B
S
Location:
High Court
of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
2.
G.M.RAVI
S/O G.MAHABALESHWARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
3.
G.M.KIRAN
S/O G.MAHABALESHWARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/O P.U.COLLEGE, YEMMIGANUR,
BELLARY DIST-583113
4.
K.V.VEDAMURTHY
S/O K.G.VEERANNA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
5.
SHOBHA
W/O T.J.NAGARAJ,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 48 YEARS
P.B.GANGADHARAIAH COMPOUND,
B.H.ROAD, TUMKUR-572101
6.
K.V.UMESH
S/O K.G. VEERANNA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 46 YEARS,
RESPONDENT No.4 AND 6 ARE
R/O NEAR GNANADHARA SCHOOL,
THYAGARAJANAGARA,
CHALLAKERE TOWN-577522
7.
SRI AVINASH
S/O NAGENDRA PRASAD,
DESIGNER IN T.T.P.TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD, BANGALORE PERMANENT RESIDENT AT
HEAD POST OFFICE ROAD,
THYAGARAJA NAGARA,
CHALLAKERE TOWN-577522
8.
V.NAGENDRA PRASAD,
S/O K.G. VEERANNA,
HC-KAR
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
BUSINESS MAN AND LORRY OWNER
R/O HEAD POST OFFICE ROAD
THYAGARAJA NAGARA,
CHALLAKERE TOWN-577522
…RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
IN OS NO.15/2012 I A NO.28 DATED 16.09.2025 PRODUCED
AS ANNEXURE-F TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC.
THIS
PETITION,
COMING
ON
FOR
PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
The present petition is filed impugning the order dated 16.09.2025, whereby I.A. No.28 filed under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘CPC’), came to be allowed.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that, though the prayers in both the suits, namely, O.S. No.15/2012 and O.S. No.27/2006, are for partition and possession, and the properties involved in both the suits are common, the basis of the respective claims rests on different pleadings, which require independent adjudication. In that view
HC-KAR
of the matter, it is contended that the impugned order staying further proceedings in O.S. No.15/2012 is unsustainable.
3. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the parties.
4. O.S. No.27/2006 was instituted seeking partition and separate possession of the schedule properties. The present suit, namely, O.S. No.15/2012, is also filed seeking partition and separate possession, though the extent of the share claimed varies.
5. O.S. No.27/2006 came to be decreed, against which R.A. No.50/2010 was preferred. In the said appeal, the decree of the trial Court was set aside. The said matter is presently the subject matter of R.S.A. No.2211/2011 before this Court.
6. The trial Court, taking note of the fact that both the suits are between the same parties and seek substantially identical reliefs, and that the outcome of R.S.A. No.2211/2011 would have a bearing on the adjudication of O.S. No.15/2012,
HC-KAR
has ordered stay of further proceedings in O.S. No.15/2012 until the disposal of R.S.A. No.2211/2011.
7. A prima facie perusal of the pleadings, prayers and schedule properties in both the suits indicates that the finding and conclusion arrived at by the trial Court are justified. Undoubtedly, the share determination in RSA No. 2211/2011 would be of assistance and binding in deciding O.S. No. 15/2012. No infirmity is found in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court.
8. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE
VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24