- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51221 WP No. 23367 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 23367 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: CHIKKAMMA, D/O LATE DASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT RUDRAKSHIPURA VILLAGE, ATHGUR HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK. MANDYA DISTRICT-571428. …PETITIONER (BY SRI K.L. SREENIVAS., ADVOCATE) AND: HONNAIAH, S/O LATE GUJJARIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT RUDRAKSHIPURA VILLAGE, ATHGUR HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571428. …RESPONDENT (BY MS ARCHANA MURTHY.,ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN O.S.NO.18/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MADDUR. QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HONBLE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MADDUR, DISMISSING LA.NO.6 NOT TAKING THE WRITTEN STATEMENT OF DEFENDANT NO.6 ON RECORD. IN O.S.NO.18/2018, ON 25-04-2025, VIDE ANNEXURE-E. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51221 WP No. 23367 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER This petition is filed assailing the order dated 25.04.2025 on I.A. No.6 in O.S. No.18/2018 rejecting the petitioner's application seeking permission to file Written Statement. The suit is for declaration and injunction in respect of immovable property measuring 36 guntas in Rudrakshipura village, Taluk Maddur. Though suit is filed in the year 2018. The written statement is sought to be filed along with an application in the year 2025 when the case was posted for cross examination of PW1. The Trial Court rejected the application on the ground that there is an inordinate delay in filing the application and delay is not properly explained. 2. This Court has perused the records. 3. It is stated in the plaint that the father of the petitioner and the father of the respondent were brothers and thereafter, there was an oral partition. Based on the said oral partition, the plaintiff is claiming right over the property. Court - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51221 WP No. 23367 of 2025 is also taken note of the fact that, though there is no written statement, the plaintiff/respondent did not proceed to lead evidence for 6 years though there is an inordinate delay in filing written statement, considering the contentions raised in the plaint and more particularly, given the fact that the relief is sought in respect of an immovable property, ignoring the technicality, the Court is of the view that the defendant should be permitted to file written statement subject to payment of cost of Rs.20,000/- payable to the plaintiff. 4. Under these circumstances, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 25.04.2025 is set-aside. The defendants No.6 is permitted to file written statement on payment of cost of Rs.20,000/- to the plaintiff. 5. If the other defendants intend to adopt the same written statement, same shall be adopted. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE CHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52