IN THE HIGH COURT OF DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 21 ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2014

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAN .M. SHANTANAGOUDAR

WRIT PETITION Nos. 108479-480/2014 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN :

GANGUBAI W/O BASAPPA AMBARAGI SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS

1. KALLAWWA W/O. SIDDAPPA AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. BHIRADI, TQ: , DIST: .

2. BHARAMA BASAPPA AMBARAGI AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. BHIRADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELGAUM.

3. BALU BASAPPA AMBARAGI AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. BHIRADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELGAUM.

4. NEELAWWA W/O. MAHADEV MAGADU AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. MADHABAVI, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELGAUM.

5. APPASAB BASAPPA AMBARAGI AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. BHIRADI, TQ: RAIBAG DIST: BELGAUM.

6. BHIMA BASAPPA AMBARAGI AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. BHIRADI, TQ: RAIBAG 2

DIST: BELGAUM.

7. SHIVAGOUDA BASAPPA AMBARAGI AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. BHIRADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELGAUM.

8. BABU BASAPPA AMBARAGI AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. BHIRADI, TQ: RAIBAG DIST: BELGAUM.

9. MALLIKARJUN BASAPPA AMBARAGI AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. BHIRADI, TQ: RAIBAG DIST: BELGAUM. ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR BURJI, ADV.)

AND

1. DAREPPA ADIVEPPA KONE AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. BHIRADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELGAUM, PRESENTLY R/AT: SANKONATTI TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELGAUM.

2. KRISHNAPPA BALAPPA NIDAVANI, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BHIRADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELGAUM.

3. MALA W/O. RAYAPPA NIDAVANI AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O. BHIRADI, TQ: RAIBAG DIST: BELGAUM. ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SRINAND A PACHHAPURE, ADV. FOR R3, R1 & R2 –SERVED.)

THESE PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE 3

THE ORDER DATED 05.08.2014 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC RAIBAG IN O.S.NO.262/2008 REJECTING THE I.A.NO.13 UNDER ORDER XXII RULE 3 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND FURTHER ALLOW THE I.A.NO.13 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE- E.

THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

By the impugned order, the Court below has rejected the application filed by the petitioners to come on record and allowed the application of respondent No.3 for impleading.

2. The application of the petitioners is rejected taking too technical view in the matter. It is no doubt true that, the application filed by the petitioners to come on record as legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff discloses the names of only 8 persons i.e., upto petitioner Nos.1 to 8.

However, the affidavit is sworn to by petitioner No.9/Sri

Mallikarjun Basappa Ambaragi s/o Basappa Ambaragi. In the very affidavit, he has stated that he is one of the legal 4

representatives of deceased plaintiff and he has sworn to affidavit on behalf of other petitioner Nos.1 to 8 also. In this view of the matter, the Court below could have condoned the typographical lapse on the part of petitioner

No.9. Hence, the impugned order in so far as rejecting the application/IA-13 filed by the petitioners to come on record as legal representatives stands set aside. IA-XIII is allowed. They shall be brought on record as legal representative of deceased plaintiff.

3. This Court does not find any ground to interfere in the matter allowing the application filed by respondent

No.3 to come on record. According to the 3 rd respondent herein, she has purchased the entire suit property on

06.03.2010. She may be proper party in the suit in question, inasmuch as, she may have to oppose the suit, if, required. Since the trial Court has exercised discretion judiciously under the facts and circumstances of the case, no interference need be made in that regard. Accordingly, 5

the writ petitions stand disposed of with the above observations.

SD/- JUDGE Jm/- CT: byg