T.SAVITHA Vs. B.P.MUNIRAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners-defendant Nos.9 and 10 in O.S. No.4409/2018 on the file of the 30th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-31) are before this Court aggrieved by order dtd. 15/9/2023 rejecting I.A.No.6 filed under Order 14 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC') to frame additional issue as to "whether the suit for partial partition is maintainable".

(2.) Heard Sri. Shashank Sridhar, learned counsel for Sri. Sridhara.N., learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. Chokkareddy, learned counsel for caveator/respondent Nos.1 to 5 as well as Sri. Manu.P.Kumar, learned counsel for Sri. C.S.Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.6 and 11 to 13. Perused the writ petition papers.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners-defendant Nos.9 and 10 would submit that the suit of respondentsplaintiffs is one for partition as well as to declare that the sale deed dtd. 8/7/2004, 9/9/2005 and 12/4/2017 are not binding on the legitimate share of the plaintiffs over the suit schedule property and also for permanent injunction. Learned counsel would submit that the petitioners as well as other defendants filed their written statement, in which, the defendants specifically contended that the suit for partition by plaintiffs is only with regard to property which has been sold by them through their GPA Holders and plaintiffs have not disclosed with regard to other properties which have fallen to their share under partition deed dtd. 10/9/1970.