- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43140 WP No. 3817 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 3817 OF 2020 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: benefit 1. SRI. G. RANGASWAMAIAH, S/O. LATE GANGARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT NO. 9, LAKSHMI NAGAR, KIRLOSKAR COLONY, KAMALA NAGAR, WEST OF CHARD ROAD, BANGALORE- 560 079. (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED) 2. SRI. G.GANGARAJU, S/O. LATE. GANGARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT NO. 9, LAKSHMI NAGAR, KIRLOSKAR COLONY, KAMALA NAGAR, WEST OF CHARD ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 079. (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED) …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SIDDAMALLAPPA P M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. RAMAKRISHNAIAH, S/O. LATE GANGARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT DEVAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, BARAGENAHALLI POST, SOMPURA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43140 WP No. 3817 of 2020 BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 111. 2. SRI. G GOPALAIAH, S/O. LATE RANGARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT NO. 57/3, 3RD CROSS, RATHNA BANGAL STORES, MAGADI MAIN ROAD, KAMAKSHIPALYA, BANGALORE - 560 079. 3. SMT. YESHODHAMMA P, W/O. RANGASWAMAIAH G, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO. 9, LAKSHMI NAGAR, KIRLOSKAR COLONY, KAMALA NAGAR, WEST OF CHARD ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 079. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. VIDYA SELVAMANY, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R3 SERVED- UNREPRESENTED; V/O DTD 23.10.2025, NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17.12.2019 IN O.S.NO.396/2009 IN I.A.NO.14 BY THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, NELAMANGALA, AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND THEREBY ORDER TO ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS AS PER ANNEXURE-D AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43140 WP No. 3817 of 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER This writ petition under article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed with a prayer to set aside the impugned order dated 17.02.2019 passed on I.A.No.14 in O.S.No.396/2009 by the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nelamangala, Bangalore Rural District. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. O.S.No.396/2009 is filed by respondent No.1 herein before the Jurisdictional Civil Court seeking the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties. In the said suit, during the course of plaintiff's evidence, I.A.No.14 was filed by the defendants under Order 11 Rule 16 of CPC with a prayer to direct the plaintiff to produce the documents as sought in the application. The said application was opposed by the plaintiff by filing objection. The Trial Court vide the order impugned has rejected the said application and being - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43140 WP No. 3817 of 2020 aggrieved by the same, defendant Nos.2 and 3 are before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that during the course of deposition, the plaintiff has admitted that the property bearing Sy.No.28/2B1 of Kenagal Village stands in the name of his wife. He has also admitted that property bearing Sy.No.103 of Dabaspet stands in the name of his wife. It is under these circumstances, I.A.No.14 was filed by defendant to direct the plaintiff to produce the documents which are sought for in the said application. The Trial Court has erred in rejecting the said application. 5. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that in I.A.No.14 filed by the defendants, they had sought to produce the following documents: i. Original sale deed under which land bearing Sy.No.28/2B1 of Kengal Village purchased. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43140 WP No. 3817 of 2020 ii. Original sale deed under which site No.103 of Dabaspet purchased. iii. Original sale deed and Power of Attorney under which site purchased of Madavara Village. 6. In the objections filed to the said application, the plaintiff has stated that original of the sale deed in respect of the property bearing Sy.No.28/2B1 of Kengal village is not with him and defendant No.3 in O.S.No.291/2016 is the custodian of the said property. It is relevant to note here that O.S.No.291/2016 is clubbed along with O.S.No.396/2009 and is taken up by the Trial Court together. Insofar as the original sale deed in respect of the site bearing Sy.No.103 of Dabaspet is concerned, the plaintiff has stated that the particulars of the said property as well as the sale deed has not been mentioned by the defendants properly and therefore, it would not be possible for him to produce the document which is sought for by the defendants. Insofar as the original sale deed and Power of Attorney of the site purchased in Madavara - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43140 WP No. 3817 of 2020 Village that is the suit schedule property is concerned, the plaintiff has produced the original sale deed and the General Power of Attorney. 7. It is under these circumstances the Trial Court having taken note of the fact that the plaintiff has produced the original sale deed and Power of Attorney of the site purchased at Madavara Village and considering the statement made by the plaintiff in this objection that the original of the sale deed in Sy.No.28/2B1 is not in its possession and is in possession of defendant No.3 in O.S.No.291/2016, rejected I.A.No.14 filed by the defendant. The Trial Court has also taken into consideration that the defendants have not given the complete particulars of site No.1 of Dabaspet, so as to direct the plaintiff to produce the sale deed of the said property with regard to the sale deed of Sy.No.28/2B1 of Kengal Village. Since the plaintiff has clearly stated that defendant No.3 in O.S.No.291/2016 is the custodian of said document, it is for the defendants to call upon the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43140 WP No. 3817 of 2020 custodian of the document to produce the document before the Court. Under the circumstances, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order impugned. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KVR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19