What did the High Court hold?

The High Court found no error in the trial court's order rejecting the application to recall the rent deposit direction. It stated that parties could apply for release of deposited rent according to their shares.

The petitioner, defendant No. 2 in a partition suit, challenged a trial court order directing certain defendants to deposit future rents. The petitioner argued that the plaintiff only had a 1/4th share and couldn't claim the entire rent deposit.

What were the issues?

Whether the trial court erred in directing rent deposit and refusing to recall its order, and whether a party with a partial share can claim the entire rent.

Shankar S/O Shivappa Belagavi vs Sumanw/O Late Umesh Tambad | Karnataka High Court 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2020 BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO.106411/2018 & WRIT PETITION NO.106650/2018 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

SHANKAR S/O SHIVAPPA BELAGAVI AGE.50 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS R/O SHIVANGA BEHIND PATIL PUTTAPP HOUSE VISHVESHWAR NAGAR HUBBALLI

…PETITIONER (BY SRI.V.M.SHEELVANT, ADVOCATE SRI.S.H.MITTALKOD, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SUMAN W/O LATE UMESH TAMBAD AGE.53 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD R/O NEAR OLD INCOME TAX OFFICE HUBBALLI

SHIVAPPA @ AJJAPPA S/O GURUAPPA BELAGAVI (RESPONDENT NO.1 HAS DIED ON 31/1/2018 HIS LRS ARE ALREADY ON RECORD AS PETITIOENR, RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 3)

SMT. MADHU W/O MARIYAPAKANEKAL AGE.55 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD

2 R/O KANEKAL, DIST. ANANTPUR ANDRA PRADESH

SANGAPPA S/O CHANNABASAPPA BELAGAVI AGE.62 YEARS, OCC.BUSINESS R/O SHIRUR PARK, VIDYANAGAR ANDRA PRADESH

SMT. VISHALAKSHI W/O SANGAPPA BELAGAVI AGE.53 YEARS, OCC.HOUSEHOLD R/O SHIRUR PARK, VIDYANAGAR HUBBALLI

SHRISHAIL S/O SANGAPPA BELAGAVI AGE.33 YEARS, OCC.BUSINESS R/O SHIRUR PARK, VIDYANAGAR HUBBALLI

CHANDRAKANT S/O MAHANTAPPA BELAGAVI AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS R/O TRAFFIC ISLAND, HUBBALLI

PRAKASH S/O GURUBASAPPA BELAGAVI AGE.68 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS R/O MAHAVEER COLONY BENGERI, HUBBALLI

UMESH S/O GURUBASAPPA BELAGAVI AGE.66 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS R/O MAHAVEER COLONY BENGERI, HUBBALLI

GOPAL S/O GURUBASAPPA BELAGAVI AGE.62 YEARS, OCC. HOSUEHOLD R/O MAHAVEER COLONY BENGERI, HUBBALLI

10.

SMT. BHANU W/O ASHOK KUBASADGOUDA AGE.68 YEARS, OCC. HOSUEHOLD R/O MAHAVEER COLONY BENGERI, HUBBALLI

11.

SMT. NARMADA W/O MAHANTESH MAHANTASHETTY

3 AGE.63 YEARS, OCC. HOSUEHOLD R/O AYODHYA ANGAR, BELAGAVI

12.

SMT. MAHADEVI W/O MAHANTESHMAHANTNTASHETTY AGE.61 YEARS, OCC. HOSUEHOLD R/O BAILHONGAL, BELAGAVI

13.

SMT.JYOTI W/O SUNIL PATIL AGE.53 YEARS, OCC. HOSUEHOLD R/O VIDYANAGAR BAILHONGAL, BELAGAVI

14.

SMT. SAVITA W/O YALLAPPA HABIB AGE.48 YEARS, OCC. HOSUEHOLD R/O AZAD ROAD, BAKAALE GALLI HUBBALLI

15.

SIDDARAMAPPA S/O GURAPPA BELAGAVI AGE.85 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS R/O SHIRUR PARK VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI

16.

SMT. GIRIJA W/O SIDDARAMAPPA BELAGAVI AGE.77 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD R/O SHIRUR PARK VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI

17.

RAMESH S/O SIDDARAMAPPA BELAGAVI AGE.54 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS R/O SHIRUR PARK VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI

18.

VIJAYANANDROADLINES LTD., A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, ITS REGD., OFFICE NH-4 P.B. ROAD, CHABBI VILLAGE, BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR VIJAY S/O BASAVANTAPPA SANKESHWAR AGE.67 YEARS, OCC.BUSINESS R/O NAVEEN PARTK KUSUGAL ROAD, HUBBALLI

19.

TIRUMALA BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS A PARTERSHIP FIRM

4 HAVINGS ITS REGD. OFFICVE, TIRUMALA TRADE CENTRE NILIGIN ROAD, HUBBALLI REPRESENTED BY ITS PARNTERS NARAYAN S/O GOPALKRISHNA ACHARYA AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS TIRUMALA TRADE CENMTRE NILIGIN ROAD, HUBBALLI

20.

RUDROSA @ KRISHNA S/O SHANKARSABADDI AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS TIRUMALA TRADE CENTRE NILIGIN ROAD, HUBBALLI

21.

MARUTI S/O MAHADEVAPPA SHIDNE AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS TIRUMALA TRADE CENTRE NILIGIN ROAD, HUBBALLI

22.

PRAKASH S/O RAMACHANDRA JADHAV AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS TIRUMALA TRADE CENTRE NILIGIN ROAD, HUBBALLI

23.

SATYANARAYAN S/O PREMANATHSA RAYABAGI AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS TIRUMALA TRADE CENTRE NILIGIN ROAD, HUBBALLI

24.

GOPAL S/O KRISHNASA KATIGAR AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS TIRUMALA TRADE CENTRE NILIGIN ROAD, HUBBALLI

25.

NARAYAN S/O LAXMANSA NITTURI AGE.MAJOR , OCC.BUSINESS TIRUMALA TRADE CENTRE NILIGIN ROAD, HUBBALLI

26.

RENUKA SWEET MART REPRESENTED BY KRISHNASA KABADE AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS OPP. OLD BUS-STAND

5 TRAFFIC ISLAND, HUBBALLI

27.

MANJUNATH WINES REPRESENTED BY CHAMPASA HABIB AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS OPP. OLD BUS-STAND TRAFFIC ISLAND, HUBBALLI

28.

MAYUR TEXTILES REPRESENTED BY A. HAYAT BASHA AGE.MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS "BELAGAVI BUILDING" BLEAGAVI GALLI, HUBBALLI

29.

NATARAJ BOOK STALL REPRESENTED BY K.R. BHAVIMATH AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS R/O" BELAGAVI BUILDING" BELAGAVI GALLI, HUBBALLI

30.

RAMESH ELECTRICALS PREPRESENTED BY S.S. BANDGE AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS "BELAGAVI BUILDING" BELAGAVI GALLI, HUBBALLI

31.

INDUS TOWERS LTD., BY SUBBU IYER, CEO KARNATAKA CIRCLE 12, TOWERING, D. SUBRAMANYA ARCHADE 7TH FLOOR, BENEERAGATTI ROAD BENGALURU-29

32.

INDUS TOWERS LTD., S. VIJAYKUMAR, AGE.MAJOR OCC.BUSINESS, ABOVE ICICI BANK BANI GIDA STOP, GOKUL ROAD HUBBALLI

33.

SANGAYYA S/O KOODLAYYA GANACAHRI AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS BASAVESHWARKHANAVALI OPP OLD BUS-STAND

6 TRAFFIC ISLAND, HUBBALLI

34.

PRABHU S/O KOODLAYYA GANACAHRI AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS BASAVESHWAR KHANAVALI OPP OLD BUS-STAND TRAFFIC ISLAND, HUBBALLI

35.

MRUTYUNJAY S/O KOODLAYYA GANACAHRI AGE.MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS BASAVESHWAR KHANAVALI OPP OLD BUS-STAND TRAFFIC ISLAND, HUBBALLI

36.

SANTOSH S/O GURUTRAYYA SALIMATH AGE.MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS BASAVESHWAR KHANAVALI OPP OLD BUS-STAND TRAFFIC ISLAND, HUBBALLI

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MAHESH WODEYAR, ADVOCATE AND SRI.NAVEEN CHATRAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1, SRI.DINESH M KULKARNI, ADV. FOR R19-R25, SRI.S.S.BAWAKHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R28 & R29, R2-R18, 26, 27, R30-R36-NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED:28.04.2018 ON I.A.NO.7 AND ORDER DATED:25.08.2018 ON I.A.NO.12 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBBALLI IN O.S.NO.238/2016 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURES-D & G RESPECTIVELY.

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

7 ORDER The petitioner/defendant No.2 in O.S.No.238/2016 on the file of the III Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi is before this Court aggrieved by the order dated 25.08.2018 on I.A.No.12 by which application filed under Section 151 of CPC seeking recall of the order dated 28.04.2018 passed on I.A.No.7 is rejected. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for respondent No.1. 3. The respondent No.1/plaintiff had filed I.A.No.7 under Section 151 of CPC seeking direction to defendants No.27, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 to deposit the monthly rent before the Court below. The same was opposed by defendant No.2 contending that the plaintiff has

8 only 1/4th share and as such he cannot seek for depositing of the entire rent amount. The trial Court on consideration of the contentions raised on behalf of both the sides, allowed I.A.No.7 and directed the defendants No.27, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 to deposit the future rents before the Court. Defendant No.2 thereafter filed I.A.No.12 under Section 151 of CPC to recall the order of deposit of rent directed to the defendants No. 27, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33 for the reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the application. The trial Court under the impugned order rejected the same on the ground that it has no power to recall its own order and the said order passed on I.A.No.7 is not challenged by the petitioner by filing a writ petition before the High Court. 4. I find no error in the impugned order so as to interfere with the same under Article

9 227 of the Constitution of India. The suit is one for partition among the family members. The Court has ordered to deposit the rent before the Court, but at the same time, it is open for the parties to file an application for release of the deposited rent to the extent of their share, if it is permissible under law. 5. If such an application is filed by the parties to the proceedings, the trial Court to consider the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders. 6. Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of.

Sd/- JUDGE

SHANKAR S/O SHIVAPPA BELAGAVI vs. SUMANW/O LATE UMESH TAMBAD

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments