LAWS(KAR)-2018-7-81

KRISHNABAI Vs. SHEVANTI

Decided On July 16, 2018
KRISHNABAI Appellant
V/S
Shevanti Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petitioners who are defendant Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.6/2015 pending in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Raibag (for brevity herein after referred to as 'Trial Court' ) have prefered this writ petition challenging the order dated 18.02.2016 passed by the Trial Court rejecting their I.A.No.V filed under Order 14 Rule 5(1) R/W. 151 CPC.

(2.) Though this matter was listed for consideration of I.A.No.1/2017 filed by the respondent Nos.5 & 6, however with the consent from both sides, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

(3.) The present respondent No.1 has filed the said O.S.No.6/2015 in the Trial Court for the relief of partition and separate possession. She has arrayed the present writ petitioner No.1 as defendant No.1 in the said original suit arraying her as the wife of one deceased Laxman Naik who is an interested party in the suit for partition. It appears that, during pendency of the said original suit the present respondent No.5 filed an impleading application seeking her impleading in the original suit claiming that she is the original and first wife of deceased Laxman Naik. The said application seeking impleading was allowed and the present respondent No.5 was permitted to come on record as defendant No.6 in the pending O.S.No.6/2015. It appears the said orders permitting the present respondent No.5 to implead as the defendant No.6 was challenged by the present petitioner in WP No.105940/2016, the said writ petition came to be dismissed by the order of this Court dated 22.02.2017. The present writ petitioner as defendant No.1 had also filed I.A.No.5 in the Court below seeking framing of additional issue to the effect as to whether the defendant Nos.6 & 7 could prove that they are the legally wedded wife and daughter of deceased Laxman respectively. The said I.A.No.V came to be rejected by the order of the Trial Court dated 22.02.2016. It is the said order, the writ petitioners (defendant Nos.1 and 2) in the Court below have challenged in this writ petition.