SMT ARCHANA D/O DUNDAPPA MASHI v. SMT SATYAVATI ALIYAS SANMATI W/O ANIL PHAAPPE CALLING HERSELF AS W/O DECEASED ROOPESH DUNDAPPA MOSHI
WP/103977/2025 · 2025-08-06
Suraj Govindaraj
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 62476 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 62476 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9951 WP No. 103977 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 103977 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SMT. ARCHANA D/O. DUNDAPPA MASHI, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC. NIL, HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KOCHARI VILLAGE, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591309. …PETITIONER
(BY SRIYUTHS. R.H. ANGADI AND SRI. PRANAV U. BADAGI, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1.
SMT. SATYAVATI @ SANMATI W/O. ANIL PHAAPPE, CALLING HERSELF AS W/O. DECEASED ROOPESH DUNDAPPA MOSHI, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. NARLI VILLAGE, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591340.
2.
SHRI ANIL S/O. BAPU PHAAPPE, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BHEEM NAGAR, TQ. CHIKODI, DIST. BELAGAVI-590001.
3.
THE CHIEF ACCOUNT OFFICER CENTRAL EXERCISE, NO.71, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI-590001.
4.
THE BRANCH MANAGER
Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9951 WP No. 103977 of 2025
SYNDICATE BANK, BRANCH NARLI, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591340.
5.
THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXERCISE, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, POST BOX NO.5400, BENGALURU- 560001.
6.
SMT. SHANTA W/O. RAMESH KAMBLE, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. AMBEDKAR NAGAR, ATTIHAL VILLAGE, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591254.
7.
SMT. SHOBHA W/O. RAJESHKUMAR TRIVEDI, BEFORE MARRIAGE CALLED AS SHOBHA D/O. DUNDAPPA MOSHI, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KOCHARI VILLAGE, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591309.
8.
SMT. BIBI, W/O. MAHADEV DHANG, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KOCHARI VILLAGE, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591309. …RESPONDENTS
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT BE PLEASED TO KINDLY ISSUE AN ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON I.A. NO.23 DATED 24.04.2025 IN P AND S.C. NO. 26/2021 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, BELAGAVI AT VIDE ANNEXURE E AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW IA NO. 23 VIDE ANNEXURE C BY ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9951 WP No. 103977 of 2025
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
“This Honble Court be pleased to kindly issue an
order in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order on I.A. No.23 dated 24.04.2025 in P and S.C. No. 26/2021 on the file of principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Belagavi at vide Annexure E and consequently allow IA No. 23 vide Annexure C by allowing the writ petition to meet the ends of justice.”
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the rejection of application under Order XVIII Rule 17 of the CPC filed in P&SC No.26/2021 for recalling the stage of adducing further evidence. The said application has been filed when the matter was posted for final
arguments. The Trial Court has rejected the said application by giving a detailed narration of the adjournments which have been sought for by the petitioner.
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9951 WP No. 103977 of 2025
3. No evidence has been led by the petitioner despite several adjournments. The details which have been laid out by the Trial Court while considering the said application clearly and categorically establishes the protraction of the matter by the petitioner. The said application for recall to lead further evidence has been filed when the matter was posted for final
arguments. Such an application cannot be allowed unless there are exceptional grounds which are made out. No such exceptional grounds have been made out. The Trial Court has rejected the said application, which order, I do not find any reason to interfere with.
4. Petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE
SH Ct:pa List No.: 1 Sl No.: 81