- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48749 CRP No. 394 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 394 OF 2024 (IO) BETWEEN: 1. SHELLYGREEN MEDOWS (P) LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI M RAMAKRISHNA REDDY HAVING ITS REGD OFFICE AT NO.1177, ROAD NO 56, JUBILEE HILLS, HYDERABAD - 500 033 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH S. ARBATTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. PUTTARAJU AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS SINCE DEAD, DELETED AS PER THIS HON'BLE COURT ORDER DATED 04.07.2016 2. SRI MAHESH S/O SRI NAGARAJA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R1 AND R2 ARE R/AT NO 225, DVM COLONY Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48749 CRP No. 394 of 2024 DEVANAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT - 562 110 3. SMT NAGARATNA W/O SRI OMKAR AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT KODIGEHALLI BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110 4. SMT SOWBHAGYA W/O SRI BASAVARAJU BIDARAHALLI AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDING AT RENUKA NILAYA KHP COLONY BANGALORE 5. SMT PUTTAMMA W/O SRI NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 225, DVM COLONY DEVANAHALLI BANGALORE - 562 110 6. SRI SHIVANNA S/O NANJUNDAPPA (SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS) SMT PARVATHAMMA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, W/O LATE SHIVANNA 7. SMT SHASHIKALA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, D/O LATE SHIVANNA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48749 CRP No. 394 of 2024 R6 AND R7 ARE R/AT SINGAVARA VENKATAGIRI KOTE DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT - 562 110 8. SMT NAGARATHNAMMA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS D/O LATE SHIVANNA W/O CHIKKAHANUMAPPA RESIDING AT RAMAIAHPALYA, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT - 561 203 9. SMT NANJAMMA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, D/O LATE SHIVANNA W/O RAVI MALLARAJAPPA RESIDING AT KODIMANCHENAHALLI DEVANAHALLI POST, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT - 562 110 10. SMT MAMATHA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, D/O LATE SHIVANNA RESIDING AT PESSANAHALLI DEVANAHALLI POST, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT - 562 110 11. SMT UMADEVI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, D/O LATE SHIVANNA RESIDING AT GALU POOJE NILLAYA, TIPPURU POST, SASALU HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT - 561 203 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48749 CRP No. 394 of 2024 12. SRI G SIDDALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O LATE SHIVANNA RESIDING AT PESSANAHALLI DEVANAHALLI POST, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT - 562 110 13. SRI MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI VENKATAPPA RESIDING AT PRASANNAHALLI DEVANAHALLI POST, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT - 562 110 14. SRI RAMACHANDRA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, S/O RAMAKRISHNAPPA DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT SRI. NAGARAJ SON OF LATE SRI. CHIKKANNA SINCE DEAD, DELETED FROM THE CAUSE TITLE AS PER THIS HON'BLE COURT ORDER DATED 28.02.2020 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.VEERABHADRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5 VIDE ORDER DATED 01.10.2024, R6 TO R14 NOTICE DISPENSED WITH) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 04.03.2024N PASSED ON I.A - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48749 CRP No. 394 of 2024 NO.18 IN OS.NO.772/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DEVANAHALLI, DISMISSING THE I.A.NO.18 FILED UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11 R/W SEC.151 OF CPC FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER 1. Heard Sri. Venkatesh S. Arabatti, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. M. Veerabhadraiah, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. Fifth defendant in O.S. No.772/2006 is the revision petitioner challenging the order dated 04.03.2024 dismissing the application filed by fifth defendant under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 3. At the outset, Sri. M. Veerabhadraiah, counsel for the caveator/respondent no.2 who is the contesting respondent being the plaintiff, submits that without - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48749 CRP No. 394 of 2024 discussing much on the merits of the matter, impugned order be set aside as it does not contain the proper reasons to dismiss the application filed by the fifth defendant and the application needs to be re-adjudicated on merits. 4. Sri. Venkatesh S. Arabatti, however tried to convince the Court that the application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure ought to have been allowed by the Trial Court. 5. In the light of the above, this Court perused the impugned order. 6. Learned Trial Judge has not properly disposed of the application filed by the fifth defendant under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 7. The only reason that is forthcoming in the impugned Order is paragraph No.11 which reads as under; - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48749 CRP No. 394 of 2024 "The Hon'ble Apex Court, in a number of reported judgments, has held that while deciding the application under Order 7 Rule 11, only the averments made in the plaint are required to be considered and not the averments made in the written statement. Therefore, I have meticulously read the entire plaint averments to know Whether the suit is barred by any law? After considering the entire plaint averments, I have not come across any averments which shows any grounds to reject the plaint as barred by any law including the law of limitation. The applicant has contended about filing of another suit in O.S.No.772/2006 in respect of the suit schedule properties. But, the plaint averments does not speak about pendency of any such suit as contended by the applicant. The parties have to lead their evidence and they have to prove that, the suit is Governed by Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act by way of their oral and documentary evidence. Without such evidence, the Court cannot accept the averments of the applicant made in his affidavit about the suit being governed under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act. If the applicant or the defendant No.5 are having sufficient oral and documentary evidence to prove their contentions, then they can do the same by leading their evidence and prove the said fact. Without doing the same, the applicant has filed the above I.A.No.18 in vain. Therefore, no grounds are made out for rejection of the plaint and hence, I answer the Points No.1 and 2 in the negative." - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48749 CRP No. 394 of 2024 8. As could be seen from the above, there is no proper discussion as to the averments of the plaint vis-a- vis the affidavit contents filed in support of IA No.18 filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 9. Suffice to say that the order of the Trial Court is not only cryptic but suffers from application of judicious mind into the rival countries of the parties. 10. Learned judge observing that while considering the application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, plaint averments alone to be considered is the settled principles of law and to that extent, the impugned order is valid. 11. But further discussion thereof especially not mentioning the suit number properly shows that there is total inapplication of judicious mind while disposing of the application void Item No.18. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48749 CRP No. 394 of 2024 12. Hence, this Court is of the considered opinion that expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter would affect the rights of the parties as they lose the chance of a revision if the matter is decided by this Court on merits. 13. Therefore, fair submissions made on behalf of the contesting respondent Sri. M. Veerabadriya is accepted and impugned order needs to be set-aside and matter needs to be remitted for fresh adjudication on Item No.18. 14. Accordingly, following order: ORDER (i) Revision petition is allowed. (ii) Impugned order on Item No.18 passed in OS No.772/2006, is hereby set aside. (ii) Matter is remitted to the Trial Court for fresh adjudication on IA No.18, after affording suitable opportunities to the parties. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48749 CRP No. 394 of 2024 (iv) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the application insofar Item No.18 of suit properties. (v) All contentions are kept open. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SNC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50 CT-SG