- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21025 WP No. 7727 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 7727 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. LAKSHMI DEVI W/O S.MUNI REDDY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT NO.190, NEAR BUS STAND, HONGASANDRA, BEGUR ROAD BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU – 560 068. 2. SRI H.M.MANJUNATH S/O S.MUNI REDDY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT NO.190, NEAR BUS STAND, HONGASANDRA, BEGUR ROAD BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU – 560 068. 3. SMT.H.M.THULASI D/O S.MUNI REDDY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO.190, NEAR BUS STAND, HONGASANDRA, BEGUR ROAD BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU – 560 068. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21025 WP No. 7727 of 2024 4. SMT.H.M.KUSUMA D/O S.MUNI REDDY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT NO.190, NEAR BUS STAND, HONGASANDRA, BEGUR ROAD BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU – 560 068. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI NATARAJ H.C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SATISH REDDY S/O LATE KODANDARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT KODATHI VILLAGE, BENGALURU EAST, CARMELARAM POST BENGALURU – 560 035. 2. SRI SRIDHAR S/O LATE KODANDARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT KODATHI VILLAGE, BENGALURU EAST, CARMELARAM POST BENGALURU – 560 035. 3. SMT.SUVARNA W/O UMA SHANKAR D/O LATE KODANDARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT KODATHI VILLAGE, BENGALURU EAST, CARMELARAM POST - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21025 WP No. 7727 of 2024 BENGALURU – 560 035. 4. MRS.BHARATHI W/O LATE K.ARAVINDA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT 403 POOJA NAVARATHNA APARTMENT II BLOCK, DODDAKANNALLI SARJAPURA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 035. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIVEK N., ADVOCATE FOR SRI RAHUL S. REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3; SRI SOURABH KURUBARAHALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASHING/ SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 01.03.2024 PASSED BY THE XVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU IN REJECTING THE APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE PETITIONER/ RESPONDENT NO. 2, 3, 16, 17 i.e. ON I A NO. 10 AND 11 UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC AND UNDER ORDER 18 RULE 17 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC IN F D P NO. 57/2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21025 WP No. 7727 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court calling in question an order dated 01-03-2024 passed by the XVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru rejecting the application filed under Order No.XVIII Rule 17 of the CPC seeking recall of P.W.1 for cross-examination. 2. Heard Sri H.C.Nataraj, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri Vivek, learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri Sourabh Kurubarahalli, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4. 3. The petitioners who are defendants/respondents 2, 3, 16 and 17 filed an application seeking to recall P.W.1 for cross- examination on the score that they have not been allowed to cross-examine P.W.1. The concerned Court rejects the application on the ground that the present petitioners claim under defendant no.1/respondent No.1 and therefore will not have a better right than the respondent No.1/defendant No.1 to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21025 WP No. 7727 of 2024 cross examine. The suit was filed for partition and it is now continued in final decree proceedings FDP 57 of 2016. 4. In the light of the petitioners being the members of the family, though claiming under the respondent No.1/defendant No.1, would be entitled to an opportunity to cross examine P.W.1. Permitting cross-examination of P.W.1 by these petitioners would not in any way prejudice any person. It is only to elicit the truth, which is the purport of Order XVIII Rule 17. In that light, without permitting the petitioners to drag the proceedings, I deem it appropriate to grant them a last opportunity to cross examine P.W.1 on the date fixed by the concerned court. 5. It is made clear that the petitioners would not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for cross examination and would complete the cross examination on the date so fixed. In the event the petitioners would not avail the opportunity of cross examining, on the date fixed by the concerned Court, the concerned Court could proceed further in the proceedings and it - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21025 WP No. 7727 of 2024 would be the loss of the petitioners, not to have availed the said opportunity. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) Impugned order dated 01-03-2024 passed by the XVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru rejecting the application filed under Order No.XVIII Rule 17 of the CPC stands quashed. The application filed by the petitioners stands allowed. (iii) The concerned Court shall permit cross- examination of P.W.1 on the date to be fixed by the concerned Court. (iv) It is made clear that the concerned Court shall not permit any further adjournment on the said date fixed for cross-examination and is at liberty to regulate its procedure thereafter. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21025 WP No. 7727 of 2024 Consequently, I.A.No.1 of 2025 stands disposed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE BKP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50