- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21957 W.P. No.43777/2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.43777/2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. NINGEGOWDA S/O LATE SRI. SIDDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS AGRICULTURIST R/AT. CHIKKA HANASOGE VILLAGE CHUNCHANAKATTE HOBLI K R NAGAR TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.K. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADV.,) AND: 1. SMT. NINGAMMA W/O LATE SRI. SIDDARAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 87 YEARS. SINCE DEAD LR'S R2 TO R5 ARE ON RECORD. 2. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA D/O LATE SRI. SIDDARAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS. 3. SMT. YASHODAMMA D/O LATE SRI. SIDDARAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS. 4. SMT. PREMAMMA D/O LATE SRI. SIDDARAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS. Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: High Court of karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21957 W.P. No.43777/2019 5. SMT. PARVATHAMMA D/O LATE SRI. SIDDARAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS. RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5 ARE R/AT CHIKKA HANASOGE VILLAGE CHUNCHANAKATTE HOBLI K R NAGARA TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT. 6. SRI. BHAVARATHNA S/O SRI. NEELAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT ARALIMARADA KOPPALU BETTADAPURA VILLAGE AND HOBLI PERIYAPATNA TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT. 7. SRI. BETTEGOWDA S/O LATE SRI. URGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS R/AT NO.85, H-3G GROUP-I 2ND MAIN ROAD HOUSING BOARD EXTENSION BELAVADI POST, HOOTAGALLY MYSURU-570018. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T.N. VISHWANATHA, ADV., FOR R7 R1 TO R6 ARE SERVED V/O/DTD:15.02.2024 LR'S OF R1 ARE ALREADY ON RECORD AS R2 TO R5) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT K.R. NAGAR IN O.S.NO.174/2017 ON 18.7.2019 ON I.A.NO.IV FILED BY THE PETITIONER U/O 13 RULE 10 R/W SEC. 151 OF CPC PRODUCED UNDER ANNX-A AND ORDER TO ALLOW IA NO.4 FILED U/O 13 RULE 10 R/W SEC. 151 OF CPC BY THE PETITIONER BY ISSUING WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21957 W.P. No.43777/2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This petition is filed seeking following reliefs: "(a) Set-aside the impugned order passed by the court of the Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, at K.R. Nagar in O.S.No.174/2017 on 18-7-2019 on I.A.No. IV field by the petitioner under Order 13 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. produced under Annexure-'A' and order to allow I.A. No.4 filed under Order 13 Rule 10 r/w Section 151 of C.P.C. by the petitioner by issuing Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ/s. (b) Grant such other suitable relief/s, writ/s, direction/s as this Hon'ble court deems fit to grant under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Sri.B.K.Chandrashekar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed an application under Order 13 Rule 10 r/w Section 151 of the CPC to summoning of the entire file in O.S.No.351/2014. However, the trial Court has incorrectly rejected the application solely on the ground that no proper grounds are made out in the application. It is submitted that the suit papers in OS.No.351/2014 are - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21957 W.P. No.43777/2019 necessary to decide the present suit filed by the petitioner and no harm would be caused if those documents are summoned, which would aid the trial Court in deciding the suit. Hence, he seeks to allow the petition. 3. Per contra, Sri.T.N.Vishwanatha, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents submits that the application is wholly premature as the parties have not yet led the evidence and the respondents, who are the defendants would lead the evidence, place all the available documents with them and at that stage, if documents do not come, then Court has ample power to summon the documents on its own. Hence, the application is devoid of merits and rightly rejected by the trial Court. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the petition. 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the respondents and meticulously perused the material available on record. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21957 W.P. No.43777/2019 5. The trial Court has rejected the application by recording reason at paragraph Nos.6 and 7 of the impugned order. The trial Court has mainly come to conclusion that no sufficient grounds are made out in the application to summon the documents in O.S.351/2014. The application produced by the petitioner at Annexure-H does not indicate which documents are required to be summoned from the file of O.S.No.351/2014 and necessity of such documents in the pending suit. In the absence of specific assertion or averment, the trial Court has rightly come to conclusion that the application is bereft of details and proceeded to dismiss it. I do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the trial Court. However, the rejection of the application by the trial Court will not come in the way of the petitioner making an application for seeking certified copy of the documents in O.S.No.351/2014 and if such application is made, the concerned authority would look into the same and issue the certified copies in accordance with law. In addition to - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21957 W.P. No.43777/2019 that, after the conclusion of the trial, if the need arises for the parties to the proceedings, it is always for the parties to proceedings to invoke Order 13 Rule 10 of CPC in accordance with law. With the above observations, writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38