Nagappa v. Dodda Bharamappa And Another

Order

1. Leave granted.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties finally in this appeal.

3. In our view, in the suit between the landlord and tenant, there was no occasion for the respondents to be joined as party-respondents. Learned counsel for the respondents stated that the respondents have already filed a suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Davangere against the appellant for permanent injunction. According to him, the suit filed by the appellant against the so-called tenant on the basis of the rent note is a collusive one. Be that as it may, in a suit between the appellant and his alleged tenant, the respondents cannot be said to be necessary or proper parties. However, as their suit on title and injunction is pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Davangere and the rent suit filed by the appellant against his alleged tenant on the basis of rent note dated 4-11-1997 is pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC, Harihar, while allowing this appeal and setting aside the impugned order passed by the High Court and also by the learned trial court in IA No. 3, interest of justice will be served if Civil Suit No. OS 23 of 1999 pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC, Harihar be transferred to the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Davangere and be analogously tried along with the respondents' Suit No. OS 8 of 1998. Ordered accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.