- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27505 WP No. 20098 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 20098 OF 2016 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. MALATHI A.S. W/O LATE H.S. SHASHIDARA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. 2. SMT. H.S. PRIYASHREE D/O LATE H.S. SHASHIDARA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS. 3. MR. H.S. SHASHANK S/O LATE H.S.SHASHIDARA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT NO.360, 10TH CROSS, NIMISHAMBA LAYOUT, RAMAKRISHNAGARA, MYSORE-570005. ALL ARE REP. BY PETITIONER NO.3, MR. H.S.SHASHANK. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI.PRASHANTH K.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. H.K. NAGARAJU S/O LATE KALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: High Court of karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27505 WP No. 20098 of 2016 R/AT 2ND CROSS, BANDIGOWDA LAYOUT, MANDYA CITY, MANDYA-571401. 2. THE COMPTROLLER UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, GKVK, BANGALORE-560 065. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. D.R. SUNDAREESH ADVOCATE FOR R1 (ABSENT); V/C/O DATED 07.02.2023 NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS ON THE FILE OF ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC AT MANDYA IN RESPECT OF O.S.1082/2015 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking following reliefs: "i. Call for the records on the file of Addl. Civil Judge & J.M.F.C at Mandya in respect of OS.No.1082/2015. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27505 WP No. 20098 of 2016 ii. Issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of Writ of Certiorari and quash the order of Hon'ble Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC at Mandya dated 29.02.16 in OS.No.1082/2015 at Annexure 'A'. iii. Any other order that this honorable court deems fit in the interests of justice, equity and good conscience." 2. Sri Prahanth.K.S., the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondent had filed an application under Section 151 of CPC, seeking to direct the petitioners to deposit the amount withdrawn by them from the account of the deceased H.S.Shashidara, in violation of the order dated 28.01.2016. The Trial Court allowed the said application under the impugned order and directed the petitioners to deposit the amount withdrawn by them, or else, they shall furnish security to the said amount. 3. It is submitted that the Application filed by the respondent is not maintainable, as he is stranger to the family and the amount withdrawn by the petitioners as - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27505 WP No. 20098 of 2016 they are the legal representatives of the deceased H.S.Shashidhara and they have also received the death benefits as he was a Government Servant. It is further submitted that the petitioner No.2 is filing an affidavit of undertaking that they would defend the suit on merits and also undertake to obey the decree subject to right of preferring an appeal. Hence, he seeks to allow the petition in view of the said affidavit. 4. There is no representation for the respondents. 5. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and meticulously perused the material available on record. 6. The respondent No.1 has filed a suit in OS.No.1082/2015 seeking decree for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,10,000/- along with interest. The petitioners denied the claim in the suit by filing written statement seeking dismissal of the said suit. 7. The respondent filed an application under Section 151 of CPC, seeking direction to the petitioners/defendants - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27505 WP No. 20098 of 2016 in the suit to re-deposit amount withdrawn from the account of late H.S.Shashidhara. The Trial Court allowed the said application and directed the petitioners to re- deposit the said amount, or else, to furnish security for the amount claimed. 8. The written statement filed by the petitioners clearly indicates that there were no transactions between the H.S.Shashidhara and the respondent No.1, as claimed in the writ petition and the issue with regard to borrowing by H.S.Shashidhara, is required to be adjudicated by the Trial Court in the pending suit and also the issue with regard to the fact that whether the petitioners would be liable to pay the said amount is also required to be adjudicated and the said exercise is required to be carried out by the Trial Court for disposal of the suit. 9. However, in the instant case the Trial Court accepting the assertion of the respondent/plaintiff, allowed the application by directing the petitioners to deposit the amount withdrawn from the account of the late - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27505 WP No. 20098 of 2016 H.S.Shashidhara by furnishing security to the said amount. In my considered view, the approach of the Trial Court is incorrect. Furthermore, petitioner No.3 has filed an affidavit on 22.07.2025. In the affidavit, at para 5, the petitioner has undertaken that they would defend the suit on merits and further undertake to obey the decree which may be passed, subject to preferring an appeal. 10. In view of the aforesaid submission and undertaking, I am of the considered opinion that the writ petition deserves to be allowed. 11. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is hereby allowed. ii. The impugned order dated 29.02.2016 passed in OS.No.1082/2015 by the Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Mandya, is set aside. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27505 WP No. 20098 of 2016 iii. Consequently application filed by the respondent is rejected recording the affidavit of the petitioner No.3. iv. No Order as to cost. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE SRK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27