- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17066 WP No. 110899 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 110899 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. TALWAR LESI SEETHAVVA D/O BHARAMAPPA, AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: CULTIVATOR, R/O: RAMANAGAR, TQ: H.B. HALLI, DIST: BALLARI-583 212. & PETITIONER (BY SRI. SIDDAPPA SAJJAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. H.N. GIRIJA W/O NANJUNARAJU D/O LATE M. UMAPATHI SHETTY, AGE: 60 YEARS, 2. M. SRINIVASA SHETTY S/O M. UMAPATHI SHETTY, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, 3. SMT. POORNIMA G. HEBASUR W/O GURUNATHE HEBASURU, D/O LATE M. UMAPATHI SHETTY, AGE: 56 YEARS, 4. DEVIKA BAGALAKOTE W/O MANOHAR R. BAGALAKOTE D/O LATE M. UMAPATHI SHETTY, AGE: 54 YEARS, CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGHCOURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17066 WP No. 110899 of 2019 5. B. SEETHALAKSHMI W/O LATE ASHOK BADNAL, D/O LATE M. UMAPATHI SHETTY, AGE: 52 YEARS, 6. M. CHANDRIKA W/O PRADEEP KUMAR D/O LATE M. UMAPATHI SHETTY, AGE: 50 YEARS, 7. T.R. VIJAYALAKSHMI W/O RAVINDRA D/O LATE M. UMAPATHI SHETTY, AGE: 46 YEARS, ALL ARE R/O: NETHAJI ROAD, RAMANAGAR, TQ: H.B. HALLI, DIST: BALLARI-583 212. & RESPONDENTS (BY MISS. RESHMA MADIWALAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 AND R3 TO R7 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON I.A. NO.4 DATED 10.04.2019 IN R.A. NO.24/2016 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI, VIDE ANNEXURE-G, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 8B9 GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17066 WP No. 110899 of 2019 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) This petition is filed assailing the order dated 10.04.2019 allowing with the application for production of additional documents. The application for production of additional documents is filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure (8Code9 for short) before the Appellate Court. The appeal is still pending. 2. The position of law relating to production of additional documents before the Appellate Court is well settled. Whenever an application is filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code, same cannot be considered independently as the same has to be considered along with the merits of the appeal, and only after the Court coming to the conclusion that the documents are necessary to decide the case, then only the Court will allow the application and would take further steps to record evidence or to afford an opportunity to other side to lead rebuttal evidence. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17066 WP No. 110899 of 2019 3. Under these circumstances, without expressing anything on the merits of the application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code, the impugned order is set-aside. 4. The matter is remitted to the Appellate Court to consider the application for production of additional documents along with the merits of the case. 5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the documents sought to be produced along with the application. Same shall be considered along with the merits of the case. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE CHS CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 71