B K Chowdappa vs K Ganapathi on 2 February, 2010

WPNO.2,4E4/ZGEO

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT 
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY_:é_§i'1€i~.'_j-L-f   _

BEFORE

THE I-IONBLE DR. JUSTICE  
WRIT PETITION No.24}g;/20V1Q_'[GM-CPC'j;  .
BETWEEN  V'  V' I 1

B.K.Chowdappa,

S/ 0. Basappa,

Aged about 58 years, '  V

Residing at Marathur '_V"i}1_age,;"VV'  '  _  

Sagar Taluk,  '   2;   A ' 

Shimoga District,   4'  'V       . ..PETI'I'IONER

(By Sri.  Advs. for
petitioner)  .. 75 '  ' _

AND

1. K.Gana;;)aU.1i, .. _
,~"S/0. K;ijgge.Ra111a Naik; ----- 
V" 1_Aged.abouf 66 

Agr'ieu'it1.1I'iStQ  ' 
Re'*i:ire::i vmge Acireiintarit,
Residing at Mara thur Vifiage,

  Sagar'"£?aiu};;' 
 ' Shimoga District.

; 2. '.':3.:::t; Seethamma.

"W/'Q."Shambu1ingappa,

 'fi;ged'§ab0ut 83 years,



W P No.2é%§4/2010

as co--defendant. The application was opposed by all the resporidents

viz., plaintiff and defendants. The trial Court ha_s""reje'et:efd:_.vthe

impleading application. He submits that since  also 

entitled for a partition, he is a proper and jj.nece:ssary*».part3;.gtor f'

adjudication of the suit, but  .4_trialf"'Court rejzectiedfll the

impleading application.  _ t E
3. The respondents viz, the pl.a'i'ntif_f~andtdefenciants to the suit

have taken the contention that pthee-.petitioner,isnot a proper and

necessary party for aci_j:nd_icat;:_ion:b for; the ground that the

petitioner took”his..:share;’fpiVii :tl1e”year_”V1’9f7v;0 and therefore he is not
entitled for any share properties.

4. The, tria’l”C:our.t* hasfalso accepted the contention of the
and passefdfthe impugned order rejecting the irnpleading

application the petitioner has got any right or share in the

‘ Vf””–..ts11it schcdiile he is at liberty to file a suit for partition and

_. his separate possession. There is no illegality or infirmity in the

V V =.._ f “in1p’tigned”‘orTer..’//

5. In the resuit, the Writ Petition fails and the same is4vh@f:t’e

dismissed.

W P N0.24i4/20 [0

iv