Man’s Claimed Wife and Children Remain in Partition Suit as Karnataka HC Leaves Their Relationship and Share Claims for Trial

The petitioners, who claimed to be the family of Defendant No. 1, brought O.S. No. 245/2022 seeking partition and separate possession of a 1/6 share in the suit property, together with mesne profits.

Respondent Nos. 7–11 applied under Order I Rule 10 CPC to be impleaded as defendants, claiming that Respondent No. 7 was Defendant No. 1’s legally wedded wife and the other applicants were his children.

The petitioners disputed their relationship to Defendant No. 1.

The Trial Court allowed the application on 18 December 2024; the petitioners challenged that order under Article 227 of the Constitution.

Order I Rule 10 CPC provides the procedural basis for adding parties to a suit.

The Court considered the applicants’ asserted interest in the partition proceedings and held that allowing them to come on record did not itself determine either their relationship to Defendant No. 1 or their entitlement to a share; those matters were for adjudication by the Trial Court at the appropriate stage after trial.

The petition was brought under Article 227 of the Constitution, and the Court concluded that the Trial Court’s order did not warrant interference.

The applicants claimed that they were Defendant No. 1’s wife and children and therefore had an interest in the partition suit.

Although the petitioners denied that relationship, Defendant No. 1 had not opposed the impleadment application.

The Court considered that the disputed relationship could not be finally determined at the impleadment stage.

Adding the applicants would allow the relevant claims to be considered in the suit, without prejudging their status or their right to partition; those questions remained for determination after a full trial.

The Court therefore found no basis to interfere with the Trial Court’s order.

The writ petition was dismissed as without merit.