(By Shri.C.Gowrishankar and Smtflirijasharlkar. Advocates')-._»
AND:
§\..2
TU
Szm.Saraswathamma.
Daughter of Late Thanamma,
Wife of Minrswamy,
Aged about 64 years,
Resrdrrag at No.47'),
Amara Jyothr Layout.
Cholanagar, 1" cross;
R.T.Nagar Post, '
Banga1ore--56() O32. ' VA " f
Smt.Par'va1£~h'a'mri1a, 3
Dau ghter r.')~f h:;rn_a1*nrna-._* if V
Wife of' Shzgrrrganna.» '
Aged a1b()ut},S9
Refsidiiag at Arriugtj;1,dE1--r1a"'Ha1li,
Hoskore' TaI'uwP<_.' < V' "
Bangalore---56() 067., S
v.':y_4S.m3t.rA::hwa1th'har:1.yana1n1na,
, V. 3 'Daxi;;jh€ef'<)f'Thanarnma,
" _ "'»'Viufe,_of I;;a_te--.T.Muniyappz1,
. ab_our;;67 years,
A ...44ReSid.ir11g_.at No.2,
'Koiarrdaéppzr Garden,
Anep"a3ya_ Audugodi Post.
AA '=BangaIore«56{) 030.
Smt.Susheelamma,
Daughter of Late Thanamma,
S
Wife 0fSeetha1'ama,
Aged about 63 years.
Residing at Sulthamipzilya Main Village,
R.T.Nagar Post,
Bangal0re--560 032. _
Shri.M.Namya11a Reddy, Advocaie for P.espb11dent».N'(:_.3} A
*$$$*
This Writ Petition is filed Ul1('011t:»r_0Px3ftiC1€S"'22At'30'£5ind 227 of the
Constitution of India praying to z1'l}'0*v»W_ti*--ie0V"v'.i_rit byiqtaash the order
dated: 27.02.2009 passed in:O.S',37;00/2000'in I.A.N0.i0 on the
file of XXXVI: Additional City 'CiV'vivi:'l'ud_gé;- }3angal()re, (CCH--39)
vide Annexure--K ansi 0
IN WRIT PETmQr:ii;;Nio.~1 1: 1:OE412<iQ8(GM'--C PC)
BE'FwEiI:lg:I;0V " - fit
1. P.S1'i11ivi:3, ' _ V . «
Grand 'son of Late'AS:'§:t:_Thanamma.
Son of Sfnt-.{30\A/ramma,
(the __LSer.;0nd F)efen.dant herein)
" "Sut 49 years,
._ "~'._ReS'i;i'in§__; Cholanayakana Haili,
' Behi_nd Government Hospital,
"0ppgsne' to Vijaya Talkies,
R.T._Nagar Post,
" * =.Ba111g;a10re--56() 032.
Z:
(By Shri.M.R.Vi_j:1ya1 Radhavan, Aciv'<)__cate__ for_-ReS'pe'1j;:ientv'_'N0;.i
Sn1t.G0wram1na,
Daughter of Late Thallummzi.
Wife of Late Papanna,
Aged about 69 years.
A: Gowri Nitayu. Hebbal. _
Behind Hebbul Government High Sehooi.
Bangal0re»S60 024.
(By Shri.C.GowrishanRar, Advocate)
AND:
1.
Smt.Saraswathamma=,.. -
Daughter of Late The1nemn~ia. V .. " "
Wife 0fMiniswamy, Le . 5' "
Aged about 6.4. )/ez1rs.,~-- . V
Residing at NQ.479,[ I
A1nara5ydEhi §;;ay_()u{.« _ _
Chet'.-1niiga1j..-""lV"er0P.,s;"*ffjj- V' V. L
R.T,_NVag£i:i_F'x_)Si,_ _ "
Ba_i1gaE01*eeS6() G32.
S mt. PaiI'vath:a mmad,' S 2.
ghter o~f_Late Thanamma,
._':_W'ife: uf,e_S ha1"{i'i1'11v:2--2L A '
'Age"'dab(5«;:1 59 years.
» L1,;
'fiesédi A nugondana Haili,
. V"L.._ij€I0S'ké5_t&:__'Li'";;'iilk,
' .__'4Ba11gai0:fe¢560 067.
S 1*nL__Asl1\va1h:1a1ra1 yana in ma.
A' '*~Da1E.1gl1Ie1" 0f"Tha11um:m1.
L " Wife of Late T.Muniyappa,
Age about 67 years,
Residing at No.2,
L'
Kolandappa Garden,
Anepalya, Audugodi Post,
Bangalore-560 030.
4. Smt.Susheelam_ma,
Daughter of Late Thanztmma,
Wife of Seetharama,
Aged about 63 years,
Residing at Sulthanapalya Main Village,
R.T.Nz1gar' Post,
Being;-1lt)i'e--5()(} 032. A .; PrESAP(:):Ni}EE&i'lT{Sv':'
(By Shri.M.V.Raghunathaehar and
Advocates for Respondent No.l .,
Shiva and Rawley, Advocates for Respondent No.4)' ' fr
This Wm Petition is:fiie»d. tinder'"Artiev_leAt§".2'26 and 227 of the
Constitution of*lri'd_iz1 a1ilc)ufthe writ by quash the order
dated: 28f.lU.2('}08 i_I1h"Q..S.3'7U0/2U0() in l.A.N0.V and VI on
the file of XXXVI_il' .}'~.r:l(iitit)"n.zrl City Civil Judge, Bangalore,
(CCH--39) viVoe.__'An.VneVxu1'e.gi< rind _ett:.,
ffihese Wi'it"Pe,tititms are coming on for preliminary hearing
l'i'n..'B"'vrgr()ttp this day, l[l'l€"C()Ui'i made the following: --
ORDER
A [The preserit petitions are filed by the defendants in the suit
” to be for partition and separate possession. The petitioner’ had
applications, one under Order VII Rule 1 l of the Code of
S
Civil Procedure, 1908, read with Section 11(2) of the l(arnataka
Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958 as well as another
application under Order Vll Rule 11 of the
Procedure, 1908, to state that there was no cause ()t”i’a.ctio,n».for tlreih
suit and that it was barred by law. These app1’ieat«ions *havingibeeni’
rejected. the petitioner is before’ this Court in tWoi’;vt}i*it’fl
petitions, namely, WP 14371/2OlO8_:’insofaras’Ethel’; question
1107,75/2()()’)ii insofar as
regarding court fees is C()f1£;e:l”‘f1ed*i_t1I1{;l.
rejection ofthe application 11Vnder”Orderf,VIlVRu’l.e” 11 on the ground
of there being abseric’e_(_’I»_f cause- of Ei.._C£il’.::C,’.11. These petitions coming
on for Pi9elimi’itary’EleitiiEng’–_(“B—-Group) is considered for final
disposal.
i_st
be maintainable. Secondly, if the property was
Sthreedhana property. it would be the»aibsolute”property”ofthe ll
fetnaie- concerned in terms of Section I2′.-. oiftihe Hiindu-.S_ucc’e:ssio’n.
Act and therefore, the courts fee payiabplye woLil_d’g1Ql 01°’
the share that was sought theirlp’lztint’if’ts~_but \yo’uldt”be on the
market value of the propertyf: _e.oii*ite:nti(_3.ns having been
negated by the tz’iallcioi§11t. these petitit)Aiis:_t1r6filed.
It obseeryred _n(:t.n/ithsteiiiding the rejection of these
application’s_ the rern_ed.yi.of’*the’«petitioner to seek the same being
tried 215;’ »p1yfeliniin-a’i”y”issues namely. whether the court fees paid
lyewlas_sin°fieientl”in View of the actmitted circumstance that the
propeiiftyiiclv;i’i1It_edl.iwtis sthreedhana property and secondly, whether
the suit was t’>v:1″i*:’ed on account of the female concerned, nameiy,
ii:det’ei’iid;tntlln().1 having sold the property during her life time and
bequeathed the remaining in favour of one of the
?>
8
defendants. whether there was cause of action by way of a suit for
partition and separate possession. in this regard it is_..t_o be
observed that the remedy of the petitioner under Order
taken away insofar as the petitioner could invoke thekpowerioiiititef V’
court to try the issue as regards court fees andiailso the’:
law barring a suit in the nature that is bi’oiu.giit.. as pife.ij’iArni’Iiary iissueifi
and it would be for the petitioner the such
issues would have to be theHCode of Civil
Procedure, E908, as Cthese admitted
circumstances i ii
3. There. is s-=.ib’stanc’e«.i__n*the~ contention of the petitioner and
hence, the petiiitiimxis are di’sposeci of while granting iiberty to the
p’etitio’ne’1′ :ri’otw’i.t&hstandiiiigithe rejection of his applications under
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with
_Sectioii.. li..{2′;o’i’ the Karnatzaka Court Fees and Suits Valuation
.4 .1957 well as rejection of his application under Order VII
._Ruiie iii ffi with regard to the absence of cause of action and the
9
9
petitioner shall make applications before the trial court seeking
that the questions. namely, as regards the Court fees and the.___cause
of action and the bar in law to which the suit in the form_’_i,s
brought preliminary issues and the trial court sha-Zl:.eonsViderlthe V’
same on its merits and proceed in ziceoijtiiiheer with Ea3i.~fi”‘
The petitions stand disposed of.
UV