- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6029 WP No. 110651 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 110651 OF 2017 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. MADHUSUDAN S/O. KRISHNA KAMATH, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT. MIRJAN, KUMTA TALUK, UTTARA KANNADA-581 343. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN C.BASAREDDY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. SRINIVAS S/O. KRISHNA KAMATH, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRs., 1(A). SMT. JAYASHREE W/O. LATE SRINIVAS KAMATH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT. MIRJANA, TALUK: KUMATA, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581343. 1(B). SRI. AMIT SRINIVASA KAMATH S/O. LATE SRINIVAS KAMATH, W/O. VISHNU BHATTA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT. MANAVA NAVANAGAR, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KUMTA TALUK, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581343. 1(C). MISS. AKSHATHA @ LAKSHMI D/O. LATE SRINIVAS KAMATH, W/O. VISHNU BHATTA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT. MANAVA NAVANAGAR, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KUMATA TALUK, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581343. 2. SRI. PURUSHOTTAM S/O. KRISHNA KAMATH, Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.04.07 15:52:52 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6029 WP No. 110651 of 2017 AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, 3. SRI. LAKSHMAN S/O. KRISHNA KAMATH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 4. SMT. RADHABAI S/O. KRISHNA KAMATH, AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS, ALL ARE R/O: MIRJAN, KUMTA TALUK, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA. 5. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER, SUB DIVISION, KUMTA, AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, NH-66, KUMTA, TQ: YELLAPURA, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT. 6. SMT. SARASWATHI, W/O. DEVDAS SHANBAUG, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, C/O. DEVADAS NAGESH SHANBAUG, R/O: YELLAPURA, TALUK: YELLAPURA, UTTARA KANNADA DIST. 7. SMT. UMA W/O. VENKATESHA BHATTA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O: GHARAG TOWERS, OPP: DON BOSCO SCHOOL, PANAJIM, GOA STATE. 8. SMT. SUNITA W/O. CHARUDUTTA ACHAR, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O: SRI KAMAKSHI, II MAIN, 6TH CROSS, SADASHIVANAGAR, BELGAUM-590 002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VISHWANATH HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4 AND R1(A TO C); SRI. ASHOK KATTIMANI, AGA FOR R5; NOTICE TO R6 TO R8 ARE SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIAL COURT ON I.A.NO.10, ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DIVN) AND JMFC, KUMTA, UTTARA KANNADA IN O.S.NO.1/2014 DATED 23.10.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND ETC. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6029 WP No. 110651 of 2017 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is by the plaintiff assailing the order of the trial Court passed on I.A.No.10 filed under Section 151 of CPC requesting the Court to recall plaintiff and permit defendant No.5 to cross-examine plaintiff. The said application is allowed by the trial Court which is now impugned in the captioned petition. 2. Heard learned counsel on record. Perused the order under challenge. 3. Defendant No.5 has filed an application requesting the Court to recall plaintiff to enable defendant No.5 to cross-examine the plaintiff. Though this application was strongly resisted by plaintiff, the trial Court in the interest of justice, was inclined to grant one more opportunity to defendant No.5 to further cross- examine plaintiff. The said application was allowed with a - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6029 WP No. 110651 of 2017 rider that defendant's counsel will not seek further time to cross-examine the plaintiff. This order is under challenge. 4. On examining the order under challenge, this Court is of the view that trial Court bearing in mind the rights of the parties, has exercised judicial discretion and has allowed the application thereby permitting defendant No.5 to further cross-examine the plaintiff. This discretion exercised by the trial Court in permitting defendant No.5 to further cross-examine plaintiff does not suffer from any infirmities that would warrant interference at the hands of this Court under Article 227. 5. On examining the grounds urged in the petition, this Court has noticed that no justifiable grounds are made out to grant any indulgence against the order under challenge. The fact that trial Court has exercised discretion and permitted defendant to cross-examine plaintiff, this Court is of the view that the order under challenge does not seriously prejudice plaintiff. Therefore, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6029 WP No. 110651 of 2017 this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order under challenge. 6. This Court having perused the prayer sought in the suit has noticed that suit is one for partition and separate possession and therefore, the fact that joint family members in ancestral property have got pre- existing right, even on this count, present petitioner is not entitled for any indulgence at the hands of this Court. 7. Writ petition is devoid of merits and accordingly, stands dismissed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14