- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2066 WP No. 31689 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 31689 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. SIDDAGANGAMMA, D/O LATE GANGAIAH, W/O NARAYANAPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/O SHINGANAHALLI VILLAGE, TUMKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT-572 104. …PETITIONER (BY SRI GOPAL K B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NAGAMMA, D/O LATE GANGAIAH, W/O HONNAGANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O BILLANAKOTE VILLAGE, NELAMANGALA TALUKA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 111. 2. MUNESHWARAIAH, S/O LATE GANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O BILLANAKOTE VILLAGE NELAMANGALA TALUKA, BANGALORE RURAL DIST.-562 111. 3. RAMAIAH, S/O LATE GANGAIHA, R/O SUBHASH NAGAR, Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2066 WP No. 31689 of 2024 NELAMANGALA TOWN, BANGALORE RURAL DIST.-562 123. 4. N G CHANDRASHEKHAR, S/O GANGARUDRAYA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O MUTHAGADAHALLI, HULKUNTE POST, DODDA BELAVANGALA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPUR TALUKA, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-561 204. …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIAL COURT THAT IS LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE NELAMANGALA IN OS NO. 341/2013 PASSED ON IA NO. 19 DATED 30TH OF AUGUST 2024 AS PER ANNEXURE-A 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 petition is filed by defendant No.1 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 30.08.2024 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Nelamangala, in O.S.No. 341/2013 on I.A.No.19 whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order 9 Rule 7 of CPC is rejected. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2066 WP No. 31689 of 2024 2. The plaintiff has filed a suit for partition and separate possession. After service of notice to petitioner and other defendants entered appearance. Petitioner did not file any written statement and the other defendants filed written statement. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the trial Court framed issues. When the matter was set down for evidence, at that time, the petitioner filed I.A.19 seeking to set aside the ex-parte order passed by the trial Court and to permit the petitioner to file written statement along with counter claim. The said application was filed after a lapse of 11 years that too after framing of issues. The trial Court has rightly rejected the application. There is no error or illegality in the order passed by the trial court. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE VP