- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11070 WP No. 104317 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 104317 OF 2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: NAGARAJ @ NAGAPPA S/O. TAMMANNA WADDAR, AGE ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRI, R/O. INAM YARAGOPPA, TQ. BADAMI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR S. BADAWADAGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. RUDRAGOUDA S/O. BHIMANAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., R/O. INAM YARAGOPPA, TQ. BADAMI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. 2. IRANAGOUDA S/O. BHIMANAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRI, R/O. INAM YARAGOPPA, TQ. BADAMI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. 3. MUTTAMMA W/O. PANDURANGA WADDAR, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER, R/O. INAM YARAGOPPA, TQ. BADAMI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11070 WP No. 104317 of 2021 4. SANTOSHKUMAR S/O. PANDURANGA WADDAR, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O. INAM YARAGOPPA, TQ. BADAMI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. 5. SANGEETA W/O. SUBRAMANYA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. INAM YARAGOPPA, TQ. BADAMI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. 6. SUNITA W/O. HANAMANTA WADIYAR, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. BEHIND BUNK AMINAGAD, TQ. HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. 7. RENAVVA W/O. KALLOLLEPPA WADDAR @ BIDARI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. BEHIND BUNK AMINAGAD, TQ. HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. 8. TEJU D/O. KALLOLLEPPA WADDAR @ BIDARI, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. BEHIND BUNK AMINAGAD TQ. HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. 9. RAMU S/O. KALLOLLEPPA WADDAR @ BIDARI, AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. BEHIND BUNK AMINAGAD, TQ. HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT. BOTH RESPONDENT 8 AND 9 ARE MINOR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL MOTHER RESPONDENT NO. 7 RENAVVA W/O KALLOLLEPPA WADDAR @ BIDARI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11070 WP No. 104317 of 2021 R/O. BEHIND BUNK AMINAGAD, TQ. HUNGAUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. 10. LAXMAN S/O. TAMMANNA WADDAR, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O. INAM YARAGOPPA, TQ. BADAMI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. 11. RAMAVVA W/O. ASHOK BANDIWADDAR, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. INAM YARAGOPPA, TQ. BADAMI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO R1 SERVED; NOTICE TO R2 TO R11 DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI WHEREBY QUASH THE ORDER DATED 08/10/2021 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT BADAMI ON IA NO.XII IN OS NO.55/2014 AND THE COPY OF THE SAME IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS WHEREBY ALLOW THE IA NO.XII FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN OS NO.55/2014 PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE COURT AT BADAMI AND THE COPY OF THE SAME IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-C1 TO THE WRIT PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11070 WP No. 104317 of 2021 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) This writ petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs: “i) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari whereby quash the order dated 08/10/2021 passed by the Senior Civil Judge at Badami on IA No.XII in OS No.55/2014 and the copy of the same is produced and marked as Annexure-E to the writ petition in the interest of justice and equity. ii) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus whereby allow the IA No.XII filed by the petitioner in OS No.55/2014 pending on the file of Civil Judge Court at Badami and the copy of the same is produced and marked as Annexure-C1 to the writ petition in the interest of justice and equity. iii) Issue any such other reliefs/directions as are deemed fit by this Hon’ble court to grant in the facts and circumstances of this case stated above in the interests of justice and equity.” 2. Sri.Shivakumar S.Badawadagi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is defendant No.2(f) in a suit filed by respondent No.1 for relief of declaration and injunction and in the said suit, the petitioner filed an application to reopen the case of the plaintiff and to recall PW.1 and PW.2 for cross-examination. However, the same came to be rejected on the ground that the defendant No.2(f) was not diligent in attending the proceedings and the suit is of the year 2014. It is submitted that on the given date, there was some - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11070 WP No. 104317 of 2021 personal difficulties for the counsel as well as defendant No.2(f) to cross-examine PW.1 and PW.2 and they were required to examine certain documents. Hence, sought time for cross- examination of PW.1 and PW.2 which came to be rejected. It is further submitted that in interregnum, defendant No.2(f) filed an application for rejection of the plaint which came to be rejected and thereafter, immediately plaintiff filed the affidavit of PW.2 and the trial Court proceeded to close the evidence of plaintiff and directed the defendants to adduce the evidence. It is further submitted that the right to cross-examine the witnesses is a substantive right of a party and merely on technicalities, the trial Court ought not to have rejected the application. Hence, he seeks to allow the application by providing one more opportunity to the defendant No.2(f) to cross-examine PW.1 and PW.2 on the given date. Thus, he seeks to allow the petition. 3. Notice of this proceedings is served on the other side. They remained absent. 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondents and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11070 WP No. 104317 of 2021 meticulously perused the material available on record. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions advanced. 5. Respondent No.1 filed a suit in O.S.No.55/2014 for relief of declaration and permanent injunction. The petitioner/defendant No.2(f) has filed a written statement denying the averments of the plaint and contended that he is the purchaser of the property from defendant No.1. The plaintiff adduced the evidence as PW.1 and the trial Court granted time to the defendants to cross-examine PW.1 and PW.2. However, on the given date, the counsel for the defendant No.2(f) could not cross-examine PW.1 and PW.2. The order sheet indicates that defendant No.2(f) filed an application for rejection of the plaint which came to be dismissed and in the meanwhile, the plaintiff has filed an affidavit of PW.2 and on that day the counsel for the defendants could not cross-examine PW.2. The trial Court recorded its reasons for rejection of the application. I do not find any error in the reasoning of the trial Court. However, taking note of the fact that the right to cross-examine is a substantive right of the party to the proceedings and its denial amounts to violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, the suit is - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11070 WP No. 104317 of 2021 required to be adjudicated on the merits of the case and considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the defendant No.2(f) will cross-examine the plaintiff witnesses if one more opportunity is provided, I am of the considered view that the application deserves to be allowed on certain terms. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 08.10.2021 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge at Badami on I.A.No.XII in O.S.No.55/2014 is set-aside. Consequently, I.A.Nos.11 and 12 are allowed subject to defendant No.2(f) paying costs of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) to the plaintiff. (iii) Defendant No.2(f) shall cross-examine PW.1 and PW.2 on 16.09.2025. (iv) The plaintiff shall make present PW.1 and PW.2 for cross-examination on the above said date. If - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11070 WP No. 104317 of 2021 in event the PW.1 and PW.2 are absent on the said date, the trial Court shall regulate its proceedings and permit defendant No.2(f) to cross-examine on the next given date. No order as to costs. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) JUDGE RH /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6