- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21118 W.P. No.45884/2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.45884/2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. B.N. ASHA D/O LATE P. NARASIMHA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.252 1ST BLOCK, 3RD CROSS PEENYA 1ST STAGE, PEENYA BENGALURU-560058. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SAMPATH A, ADV.,) AND: 1. SRI. S. KESHAVA RAO S/O LATE SRINIVASA RAO AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS. 2. SMT. MANJULA @ VANAJA BAI W/O SRI. S. KESHAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS. BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.252 1ST FLOOR, C/O. NARASIMHA MURTHY BUILDING, 1ST BLOCK, 3RD CROSS PEENYA 1ST STAGE, PEENYA BENGALURU-560058. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.K. VASANTH, ADV., FOR R1 & R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI/ANY OTHER WRIT/DIRECTION FOR QUASHING/SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE VIII Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: High Court of karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21118 W.P. No.45884/2019 ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BEGNALURU [CCH- 15] IN O.S.NO.6868/2010 DTD13.9.2019 PASSED ON I.A.NO.27 AND 28 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This petition is filed seeking following reliefs: a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari/any other writ/Direction for quashing/setting aside the Impugned order passed by the Hon'ble VIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, (CCH-15), in O.S.No.6868/2010, dated : 13-09-2019 passed on I.A. No.27 & 28 produced at ANNEXURE-'A' and; b) Grant such other relief/s that this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Sri.Sampath A., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed an application in IA.No.27 under Order 18 Rule 17 r/w Section 151 of CPC and an application in IA No.28 under Section 151 of CPC seeking to recall the order dated 09.08.2019 and to permit the petitioner to cross examine DW.1 and to reopen the case. However, the trial Court without assigning any reason dismissed the applications. It - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21118 W.P. No.45884/2019 is submitted that in the affidavit accompanying the aforesaid applications, a specific reason has been assigned as to why the counsel for the plaintiff could not cross examine DW.1 on 09.08.2019. However, the trial Court without considering the same rejected the applications and posted the matter for arguments. It is submitted that further cross examination of DW.1 is necessary to completely adjudicate the dispute between the parties and unless that opportunity is provided, great prejudice and injustice would be caused to the petitioner. Hence, he seeks to allow the petition. 3. Per contra, Sri.K.K.Vasanth, learned counsel appearing for the respondents vehemently opposes the applications and submits that the filing of the applications after the matter is posted to arguments is nothing but dragging the proceedings unnecessarily and the present applications are 27th and 28th applications in the suit, which also indicates that the petitioner is interested in - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21118 W.P. No.45884/2019 dragging the proceedings. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the petition. 4. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the respondents and meticulously perused the material available on record. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions advanced. 5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner filed OS.No.6868/2010 seeking relief of permanent injunction against the respondents with regard to the suit schedule property. The parties have adduced the evidence. The petitioner has cross-examined DW.1 partly. However, on 09.08.2019, the learned counsel for the petitioner could not cross-examine DW.1 on the ground that he was suffering from ill health, giddiness, high BP etc., and on the said date, though the request was made for deferment of cross-examination, the trial Court proceed to reject the said request and posted the matter for arguments. In the present the proceedings in suit are stayed. Considering the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21118 W.P. No.45884/2019 explanation offered at paragraph No.5 of the affidavit, I am of the considered opinion that interest of justice would be met if one opportunity is provided to the petitioner to cross-examine DW.1 on a given date subject to certain terms. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) Writ petition is allowed. ii) Impugned order dated 13.09.2019 passed on IA.Nos.27 and 28 in O.S.6868/2010 by the VIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, (CCH-15) is hereby set aside. Consequently, IA.Nos.27 and 28 are allowed. iii) DW.1 is directed to present before the Court on 02.07.2025 without any notice. On the said date, the petitioner shall cross examine DW.1 subject to the petitioner paying cost of Rs.3,000/- to the DW.1. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0