- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42105 CRP No. 88 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.88 OF 2023 BETWEEN: SRI M B CHIDANAND S/O M V BASAVARAJU AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO.820, CHADURANGA ROAD, T K BADAVANE, 13TH MAIN, CHAMARAJA MOHALLA MYSURU-571 313 …PETITIONER (BY SRI Y.V.PRAKASH FOR SRI Y K NARAYANA SHARMA, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. SMT PUTTAMMA W/O LATE CHIKKALINGAPPA @ CHIKKALINGAIAH AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/AT HOUSE NO.1777, 5TH CROSS, NORTH, ANIKENTHANA ROAD, KUVEMPUNAGAR MYSURU-570023 2. SMT PUTTAGOWRAMMA W/O LATE DEVARAJU AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, 3. MASTER RAVIKUMAR S/O LATE DEVARAJU AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, 4. KUMARI RAMYA Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42105 CRP No. 88 of 2023 D/O LATE DEVARAJU AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.3 AND 4 BEING MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. PUTTAGOWRAMMA, RESPONDENT NO.2 RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 4 ARE RESIDING AT C/O PARVATHAMMA ALOKA ROAD, YELWALA VILLAGE AND POST MYSURU TALUK-571 130 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI Y.K.NARAYANA SHARMA, ADVOCATE) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, AGAINST ORDER DATED 18.10.2022 PASSED IN MISC.No.52/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MYSURU, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 9 RULE 13 OF CPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri Y.V. Prakash, appearing on behalf of Sri Y.K. Narayana Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Revision petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.58/2014. Defendant No.4 did not contest the suit after engaging the counsel and challenge the decree claiming that - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42105 CRP No. 88 of 2023 the decree passed in O.S.No.58/2014 was an exparte decree. Thereafter, defendant No.4 filed petition under Order IX Rule 13 CPC before the Senior Civil Judge in Miscellaneous No.52/2018 seeking for an order of setting aside the exparte decree passed in O.S.No.58/2014. 3. On contest said miscellaneous petition came to be allowed on payment of Rs.2,000/- payable by the defendant No.4 to the plaintiff. Said order is challenged in this revision petition. 4. Sri Y.V. Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff submits that there is no proper explanation for delay in filing the miscellaneous petition resulting in miscarriage of justice and sought for admitting the revision petition for further consideration. 5. On perusal of the material on record in the light of the argument put forth on behalf of the petitioner/plaintiff, this Court does not find any legal infirmity or perversity in the impugned order. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42105 CRP No. 88 of 2023 6. Learned trial Judge in Miscellaneous No.52/2018 used her discretion and passed the order by furnishing cogent and convincing reasons. 7. Accordingly there is no scope for revising the said well-reasoned order. 8. Hence, the following: ORDER Civil Revision petition is meritless and hereby dismissed. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE MR