- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29005 WP No. 18845 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 18845 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SHANTHAMMA W/O. REVANNA SIDDAIAH, D/O. LATE SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/O. DYAVALINGAIAHANNA PALYA, HEJJALA DHAKALE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT, KARNATAKA-562 109. 2. SMT. RANGAMMA W/O. VENKATA NAGAIAH, D/O. LATE SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O. GIRI GOWDANADODDI, THATTAGUPPE POST, UTHRAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, KARNATAKA-560 082. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VINAY., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VENKATESHA MOUNI.K.M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. T.JAYASHANKAR S/O. LATE THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O. NO. 527, 2ND MAIN, 1ST BLOCK, BANASHANKARI 1ST STAGE, SRINAGARA, BENGALURU-560 050. Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29005 WP No. 18845 of 2024 2. SRI. NARASIMHA S/O. LATE SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O. THIMMEGOWDANA DODDI, ITTAMADU DHAKALE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT, KARNATAKA-562 119. 3. SMT. PUTTALAKSHMAMMA W/O. GOPALA KRISHNA, D/O. LATE SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O. DYAVALINGAIAHANNA PALYA, HEJJALA DHAKALE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT, KARNATAKA-562 119. 4. SMT. NETHRAVATHI W/O. CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O. THIMMEGOWDANA DODDI, ITTAMADU DHAKALE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT, KARNATAKA-562 119. 5. SMT. USHA W/O. NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O. THIMMEGOWDANA DODDI, ITTAMADU DHAKALE, BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT, KARNATAKA-562 119. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29005 WP No. 18845 of 2024 ORAL ORDER Sri.Vinay., counsel on behalf of Sri.Venkatesha Mouni.K.M., for the petitioners has appeared in person. 2. Though the matter is listed for orders regarding non-compliance of the office objections, with the consent of the counsel for the petitioners, it is heard. 3. The order dated 31.05.2023 passed by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Ramanagara on I.A.No.4 in O.S.No.12/2018 is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 4. Counsel for the petitioner has urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 5. The short point that requires consideration is whether the order of the Trial Court requires interference. 6. Suffice it to note that the plaintiff filed a suit seeking the relief of Specific Performance. After the issuance of the suit summons, the first defendant - Smt.Rajamma - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29005 WP No. 18845 of 2024 appeared through her advocate and filed a detailed written statement on 12.02.2018. It is noted that she died on 12.12.2019. The petitioners contended that they are the legal representatives of Smt.Rajamma and moved an application requesting the Court to condone the delay in submitting the written statement and accept the same. The Trial Court rejected the application on the ground that Smt.Rajamma had already filed the written statement. In my view, the rejection is just and proper. Needless to say that petitioners' mother had already filed a written statement, hence, the question of filing a separate written statement by her legal representatives does not arise. At best, they can rely upon the written statement filed by their mother. I find no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the Trial Court on I.A.No.4. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be rejected. 7. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is rejected. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5