- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19913 WP No. 15939 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 15939 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. PURVA ZENTECH BUSINESS PARK HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BAKASIPURA, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE HAVING CONSTRUCTION SITE AT DODDAKALLASANDRA, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 062. DEVELOPED BY PURVA RUBY PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 130/1, ULSOOR, BANGALORE - 560 042, REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS EXECUTIVE- LEGAL AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MS. SHREYA V.K. JAIN. 2. M/S. PURAVANKARA LIMITED, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 130/1, ULSOOR, BANGALORE - 560 042, REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS EXECUTIVE- LEGAL AND Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19913 WP No. 15939 of 2025 AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MS. SHREYA V.K. JAIN. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ANANDARAMA K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. M. JAYALAKSHMI, W/O SRI. T. SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 2. SRI. T. SIDDAPPA, S/O. LATE SRI. THAMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS BOTH RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. 480, SYNDICATE BANK ROAD, VENKATA REDDY LAYOUT, DODDAKALLASANDRA, BENGALURU - 560 062. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOKA T., ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN O.S.NO.2655/2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF XXXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU (CCH-36) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19913 WP No. 15939 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court calling in question allowing of an application filed by the respondents - plaintiffs under Order VI Rule 17 of the C.P.C. 2. Heard Sri. Anandarama K., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. Ashoka T., learned counsel appearing for the respondents and have perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that in the Written Statement, it was clearly indicated who is the entity, against whom, the plaintiffs would proceed, notwithstanding the same, the entity that is now sought to be brought in by way of an application under Order VI Rule 17 of the C.P.C., is entirely different. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19913 WP No. 15939 of 2025 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance upon paragraph No.4 of the Written Statement, where the name of the entity is clearly indicated. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents, at this juncture, submits that he be reserved liberty to implead the appropriate entity, as it is the case of demand of compensation from the hands of the entity. Therefore, an appropriate entity should be made a party to the proceedings. 6. In that light, I deem it appropriate to permit the respondents - plaintiffs to file a fresh application, in accordance with law, to bring in the appropriate entity, which is indicated at paragraph No.4 of the Written Statement. 7. In the light of the said submission, the order impugned is necessarily to be obliterated. 8. In that light, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed-in-part. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19913 WP No. 15939 of 2025 (ii) Proceedings in O.S.No.2655/2023 pending before the XXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-36), stands quashed. (iii) Liberty is reserved to the respondents - plaintiffs to implead the appropriate entity in a manner known to law. All other contentions except the one considered hereinabove, shall remain open Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24 CT: BHK