- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5058 WP No. 25069 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 25069 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. MANJULA. V AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS WIFE OF SRI P V VENKATESH PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO 22 1ST CROSS, SHAMANNA GARDEN BANNERGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE-560030. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. YUGANDHAR J.,ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. AMARESH. T. M. AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS SON OF SRI MUNISWAMY T V RESIDING AT NO 428, NEAR CHURCH MADHURE NAGAR, VARTHUR POST BANGALORE-560087. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. S SUMATHI, ADVOCATE C/R) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING / SETTING ASIDE THE ORDERS DATED 1ST AUGUST, 2024 PASSED BY THE HONBLE XVII ADDL CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU IN OS NO. 4484 OF 2012 DISMISSING THE IA NOS 13 AND 14 FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER ORDER XVII RULE 10(A) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE AND UNDER ORDER XVI RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, UNDER Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5058 WP No. 25069 of 2024 THE ORIGINAL OF ANNEXURE-G AND H AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAID IA NOS 13 AND 14 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed by the plaintiff under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 01.08.2024 passed by the XVIII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in O.S.No.4484/2012, whereby IA Nos. 13 and 14 filed by the plaintiff have been dismissed. 2. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration. In that, she filed IA No. 13 under Order XXVI Rule 10(a) of CPC to send Exs. D2 and D3 for scientific investigation and IA No.14 under Order XVI Rule 1 of CPC seeking witness summons to 3 witnesses. The trial court, by order dated 01.08.2024, dismissed the said applications. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. The trial court, while dismissing IA No.13 has given a finding that the plaintiff has sought for - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5058 WP No. 25069 of 2024 appointment of the Commissioner to examine Ex.D2 and D3 produced by the defendant and has not sought for comparing the signature of GPA holder appeared in Ex.D6 and she has not specifically stated that which are the admitted signatures to be compared with that of disputed signatures. Therefore, the trial court has rightly rejected the application IA No.13 under Order XXVI Rule 10A of CPC. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner/ plaintiff submits that she may be permitted to file a fresh application with proper prayer and relief. 5. In view of the above, the following order is passed: (i) The writ petition is disposed of. (ii) The order passed by the trial court on IA No.14 is just and reasonable and there is no error or illegality in the said order and the same is confirmed. (iii) The order passed by the trial court on IA No.13 is set aside, reserving liberty to the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5058 WP No. 25069 of 2024 petitioner/plaintiff to file a fresh application, in accordance with law. (iv) If such an application is filed, the trial court is directed to consider the same, in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to the parties. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20