- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46759 WP No. 32906 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION No. 32906 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI KARAN D. M., S/O SRI MANJUNATH D. K, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT No. 121, APOORVA, 1ST CROSS, TEMPLE ROAD, ROOPANAGAR, MYSURU 570026. …PETITIONER (BY SRI MILASH ARROL NORONHA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. CHAITHRA, D/O SRI E. INDREGOWDA, W/O SRI G. YOGESH, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, RESIDING AT YELWALA VILLAGE, YELWALA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT 571130. 2. SRI CHAITHANYA, S/O SRI E. INDREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, RESIDING AT YELWALA VILLAGE, YELWALA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT 571130. Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46759 WP No. 32906 of 2025 3. SRI E. INDREGOWDA, S/O LATE EERAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT YELWALA VILLAGE, YELWALA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT 571130. 4. SMT. VASANTHA, W/O SRI E. INDREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT YELWALA VILLAGE, YELWALA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT 571130. 5. SMT. K. JAYANTHI, W/O P. MANOHARAN, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT No.58, 6TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, JAYALAKSHMIPURAM, MYSURU, KARNATAKA 570012. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE LEARNED XI ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MYSURU TO EXPEDITE AND DISPOSE OF O.S. No. 20/2018 WITHIN A FIXED TIME FRAME, PREFERABLY WITHIN 6 MONTHS OR SUCH TIME AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY VIDE ANNEXURE-C. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46759 WP No. 32906 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL ORDER Heard Sri. Milash Arrol Noronha, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This writ petition is filed seeking direction to the XI Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Mysuru (for short, 'trial Court') in O.S.No.20/2018 for disposal of the suit within time frame. The petitioner is defendant No.4 in the suit. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is the purchaser of the suit schedule property, and that the suit filed by the plaintiffs against defendants is one for partition. In view of the pendency of the suit, the parties are allegedly interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. 3.1 Learned counsel submits that the suit is of the year 2018 and that the written statement was filed in 2019, whereas issues came to be framed only on 06.03.2025. He further submits that the plaintiffs and defendant Nos. 1 to 3 are likely acting in collusion to defeat the petitioner’s rights. It is also - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46759 WP No. 32906 of 2025 submitted that, due to the pendency of the suit, the parties are attempting to interfere with the petitioner’s possession of the suit schedule property. Hence, he prays that the trial Court be directed to dispose of the suit within a time frame. 4. The submissions made are premature. If the possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property are interfered with by the plaintiffs or defendant Nos. 1 to 3, the petitioner is not without a remedy. Since the petitioner can seek appropriate orders from the trial Court, that ground is not sufficient to issue a mandamus for expeditious disposal. However, this Court notes that the suit was filed in the year 2018 and, though the written statement was filed in 2019, the trial Court framed issues only on 06.03.2025. 5. This Court finds no reasonable ground for the suit not having progressed between 2019 to 2025. Though the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is not acceptable, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the trial Court to dispose of the suit in O.S. No.20/2018 expeditiously, ensuring that no delay is caused by unnecessary adjournments. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46759 WP No. 32906 of 2025 6. Except for the above observations, the writ petition is not entertained; accordingly, disposed of. Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE DDU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7