- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45290 WP No. 15262 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 15262 OF 2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI RAGHU J S/O LATE J.V. JAYARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT RAGHU FARM SINGAPURA, VIDYARANYA PURA POST BANGALORE - 560 097. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. SUGUNA R, REDDY, ADV.,) AND: 1. SRI VARADAPPA S/O MUNIBYALAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT HEROHALLIYPALYA SEETHA KEMPANAHALLI HESARAGHATTA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK. 2. SRI NARASAPPA S/O DUMA @ PUJIGA AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS R/AT SINGAPURA YELAHANKA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK. …RESPONDENTS (V/O/DTD:23.08.2021, NOTICE TO R-2 IS WAIVED; V/O/DTD"27.10.2021, NOTICE TO R-2 IS H/S AND PLACED EXPARTE) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN O.S NO.5355/2017 FROM THE FILE OF THE VII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45290 WP No. 15262 of 2021 SESSIONS JUDGE,BANGALORE CITY AND QUASH OR SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 2-6-2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, PASSED BY THE VII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY ON I.A NO.1 IN O.S NO.5355/2017 AND TO ALLOW THE SAID I.A NO.1 TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. Defendant no.3 has filed this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to set aside the order dated 02.06.2021 passed on IA.no.1 in O.S.No.5355/2017 by the Court of VII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. Contesting respondent no.1 who is served in the matter, has unrepresented before this Court. 3. Suit in O.S.No.5355/2017 is filed before the jurisdictional Civil Court at Bengaluru by respondent no.1 herein seeking the relief of partition and separate possession and permanent injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. In the said suit, petitioner herein is arrayed as defendant no.3. On 13.04.2018, defendant no.3 had entered appearance before the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45290 WP No. 15262 of 2021 Trial Court in O.S.No.5355/2017 and the matter was adjourned to 28.05.2018. On the said date, time was prayed on behalf of defendant no.3 to file written statement. However, on the ground that 90 days time has already lapsed, the time prayed on behalf of defendant no.3 to file the written statement was rejected and the written statement was taken as not filed on behalf of defendant no.3 and the matter was posted for evidence. 4. It is relevant to note here that as on 28.05.2018, 90 days had not lapsed from the date defendant no.3 had entered appearance before the Trial Court. The order sheet would reflect that thereafter the matter was being adjourned for reporting settlement, and on 12.03.2021, IA.no.1 was filed on behalf of defendant no.3 under Section 151 CPC with a prayer to permit him to file written statement and along with IA.no.1, two sets of his written statement were also filed. The Trial Court vide the order impugned dated 02.06.2021 has rejected the said application. 5. Perusal of the order impugned would go to show that the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the plaintiff had orally - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45290 WP No. 15262 of 2021 submitted that he has no objection to allow IA.no.1. Inspite of the same, the Trial Court has rejected the application on the ground that the same was filed belatedly. Undisputedly, the trial in case had not yet commenced as on the said date and prior to the same, the matter was adjourned for a considerable period of time to report settlement It is only after negotiation for settlement had failed, the matter was once again posted for recording plaintiff's evidence, and at that stage, IA.no.1 was filed on behalf of defendant no.3 along with his written statement. It is trite that the time to file written statement by a defendant is only directory and not mandatory, and unless there is an inordinate delay, in normal circumstances, the Courts should be liberal in permitting the contesting defendants to file their written statement, which would enable the Court to effectively adjudicate the dispute between the parties. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the Trial Court was not justified in rejecting IA.no.1 filed in O.S.No.5355/2017. Accordingly, the following order: 6. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 02.06.2021 passed on IA.no.1 in O.S.No.5355/2017 by the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45290 WP No. 15262 of 2021 Court of VII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is set aside. The prayer made in IA.no.1 is granted, subject to payment of costs of Rs.2,000/- by defendant no.3 to the plaintiff, on the next date of hearing before the Trial Court. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KK