SANGEETA vs PUSHPAVATI
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10984
WP No. 202725 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030075492026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 7 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
WRIT PETITION NO. 202725 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SANGEETA
W/O LATE SANTOSH KATAKAM,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. H.NO.8-10-65,
HOUSING BOARD COLONY,
BEHIND OLD BUS STAND,
BIDAR-585 401.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAVI B. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by B NAGAVENI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. PUSHPAVATI
W/O LATE ESHWARAYYA KATKAM,
AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. H.NO.8-10-65,
HOUSING BOARD COLONY,
BEHIND OLD BUS STAND,
BIDAR-585 401.
2. SRINIVAS S/O LATE ESHWARAYYA KATKAM,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. H.NO.8-10-65,
HOUSING BOARD COLONY,
BEHIND OLD BUS STAND, BIDAR-585 401.
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10984
WP No. 202725 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030075492026
3. SUREKHA D/O LATE ESHWARAYYA KATKAM,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. H.NO.8-10-65,
HOUSING BOARD COLONY,
BEHIND OLD BUS STAND,
BIDAR-585 401.
4. RAJU S/O LATE ESHWARAYYA KATKAM,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. H.NO.8-10-65
HOUSING BOARD COLONY,
BEHIND OLD BUS STAND, BIDAR- 585401.
5. GIRIDHAR S/O LATE ESHWARAYYA KATKAM,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. H.NO.8-10-65,
HOUSING BOARD COLONY,
BEHIND OLD BUS STAND, BIDAR-585401.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHESHADRI JAISHANKAR M., ADVOCATE FOR
R1, R4 & R5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED ON I.A.NO.IV FILED UNDER ORDER XL
RULE 1 R/W 151 OF CPC IN OS NO.348/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE
OF II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT BIDAR DATED
02.06.2026 AS AT ANNEXURE-E AND CONSEQUENTIALLY TO ALLOW
THE APPLICATION IN I.A.NO.IV FILED BY THE PETITIONER/
PLAINTIFF IN ENTIRETY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10984
WP No. 202725 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030075492026
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging
the order dated 02.06.2026 passed on I.A.No.4 in
O.S.No.348 of 2024 by the II-Additional Senior Civil
Judge and JMFC, Bidar.
2. Brief facts giving rise to filing of this petition are as
under:
The petitioner filed a suit for partition and separate
possession in O.S.No.348 of 2024. Respondent Nos.1
and 3 to 5 filed written statement. The petitioner
filed an application in I.A.No.4 under Order XL Rule 1
read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure
(for short, ‘CPC’) for appointment of a Receiver
alleging that the respondents are not paying the
rent/maintenance. Accordingly, prayed to allow the
application. The said application was opposed by the
respondents by filing objections contending that the
respondents are paying the amount to the
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10984
WP No. 202725 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030075492026
plaintiff/petitioner through online payment. It is also
contended that the petitioner has failed to establish
the ingredients of Order XL Rule 1 of CPC and prayed
to dismiss the application. The Trial Court, after
hearing the learned counsel for the parties, rejected
I.A.No.4 vide order dated 02.06.2026. The petitioner
aggrieved by the same filed this writ petition.
3. Heard the arguments of Sri.Ravi B. Patil, learned
counsel for the petitioner. None appears for
respondent Nos.1, 4 and 5.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
respondents have not paid the rent/maintenance
amount and they are in occupation of the suit
schedule property. It is contended that the Trial
Court without considering the said aspect has
recorded a finding that the petitioner has not
produced any record to show that the properties are
not properly managed by the respondents. The said
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10984
WP No. 202725 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030075492026
finding is contrary to the records. Hence, on these
grounds, he prays to the allow the writ petition.
5. Perused the petition papers and considered the
submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner.
6. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner filed a suit
for partition and separate possession in O.S.No.348
of 2024. The respondents appeared and filed written
statement denying the averments made in the plaint.
In the meanwhile, the petitioner filed an application
under Order XL Rule 1 of CPC for appointment of a
Receiver on the ground that the respondents are not
paying the rent to the petitioner. Mere non-payment
of rent is not a ground to appoint a Receiver under
Order XL Rule 1 of CPC. On the other hand, the
respondents have produced the records to show that
the said amount has been transferred to the
petitioner through online. The said fact has not been
denied by the petitioner by filing a rejoinder. The
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10984
WP No. 202725 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030075492026
Receiver can be appointed only if the party is trying
to remove any person from the possession or
custody of the property or commit the same to the
possession, custody or management of the Receiver.
7. Admittedly, from the perusal of the affidavit filed by
the petitioner, it would indicate that the ingredients
of Order XL Rule 1 of CPC are silent. The Trial Court
placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of S.Saleema Bee vs. S. Pyari
1
Begum and another has rightly held that the
petitioner has failed to prove necessary ingredients
of Order XL Rule 1 of CPC and has rightly rejected
the application. Hence, I do not find any grounds to
interfere with the impugned order passed by the Trial
Court.
8. Accordingly, I proceeded to pass the following:
1
ADR 2000 SC 3513 (1)
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10984
WP No. 202725 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030075492026
ORDER
The writ petition is dismissed .
Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI)
JUDGE
NB
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8
Ct:pk