- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49597 WP No. 32782 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 32782 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI SUBBAPPA, S/O LATE MUNIVENKATARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, SINCE DEAD BY LRS' 1(A) SRI. DEVARAJU.S, S/O LATE SUBBAPPA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 1(B) SRI. CHALANRAJU, S/O LATE SUBBAPPA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS PETITIONER NO.1(A) AND 1(B) BOTH ARE R/AT CHIKKA THIRUPATHI VILLAGE, LAKKUR HOBLI, MALUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 160. 2. SRI N. VASU, S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, 3. SRI CHANDRAIAH, S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, 4. SRI SURESH BABU, S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49597 WP No. 32782 of 2018 ALL ARE R/AT CHIKKA THIRUPATHI VILLAGE, LAKKUR HOBLI, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 160. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. G R LAKSHMIPATHY REDDY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT VIMALAMMA, W/O LATE NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 2. SMT.N VEDHA, D/O LATE NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 3. N MANJUNATH, S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT CHIKKA THIRUPATHI VILLAGE, LAKKURU HOBLI, MALUR TALUK - 563 160. 4. SRI S VINAY BABU, S/O S B BABU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT S V TOWERS, NO.198, 2ND FLOOR, 5TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 026. 5. SRI.SHIVAKUMAR, S/O RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, (SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY LRS (AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 23.07.2025) 5(a) SMT. RAVIKALA, W/O LATE SHIVAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49597 WP No. 32782 of 2018 5(b) SRI S.N. PUNITH KUMAR, S/O LATE SHIVAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, 5(c) S.N. RAKSHIT KUMAR, S/O LATE SHIVAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, RESPONDENTS 5(a) AND 5(c) ARE RESIDING AT POST OFFICE ROAD, INDIRANAGAR, NELAMANGALA TOWN AND POST, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123. …RESPONDENTS (V/O DTD 18.03.19 NOTICE TO R1 AND R3 H/S; V/O DTD 18.06.25 NOTICE TO R4 H/S; V/O DTD 28.11.25 NOTICE TO R2 H/S; PROPOSED R5(A), R5(B), R5(C)- SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN O.S.NO.38/2014 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE MALUR. QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE MALUR IN O.S.NO.38/2014 DTD 23.6.2018 MADE ON IA NO.11 TO 13 AS PER ANNEXURE-Q AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER Plaintiff is before this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to set aside the order dated 23.06.2018 passed on - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49597 WP No. 32782 of 2018 I.A.Nos.11 to 13 in O.S.No.38/2014 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Malur vide Annexure - Q. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Petitioners herein have filed O.S.No.38/2014 before the Jurisdictional Civil Court at Malur seeking relief of declaration of title and consequential relief of permanent injunction in respect of suit schedule A to D properties. In the said suit, the contesting defendants have filed their written statement opposing the suit claim. Immediately after the evidence of the plaintiffs was concluded, I.A.Nos.11 to 13 were filed on behalf of the plaintiffs to reopen the case, re-call PW.1 and to permit to produce five additional documents. The said applications was opposed by the contesting defendants by filing objections. The Trial Court vide the order impugned has rejected I.A.Nos.11 to 13 and being aggrieved by the same, plaintiffs are before this Court. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49597 WP No. 32782 of 2018 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners having reiterated the grounds urged in this petition submits that immediately after the evidence of the plaintiffs was closed, I.A.Nos.11 to 13 were filed on behalf of the plaintiffs. The additional documents are material documents to prove the case of the plaintiffs; the Trial Court has erred in rejecting the applications. Accordingly, he prays to allow this petition. 5. Respondents who are served in the matter have remained unrepresented before this Court. 6. Petitioners have filed O.S.No.38/2014 with a prayer to declare their title in respect of suit schedule A to D properties and also for consequential relief of permanent injunction in respect of the said properties. Based on the rival pleadings, the Trial Court had framed issues and after the recording of the plaintiffs evidence was closed, I.A.Nos.11 to 13 were filed on behalf of the plaintiffs. I.A.No.11 was filed under Section 151 of CPC to reopen - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49597 WP No. 32782 of 2018 the stage of the case, I.A.No.12 was filed under Order 18 Rule 17 to re-call PW.1 for the purpose of his further evidence and I.A.No.13 was filed under Order 7 Rule 14(3) read with Section 151 of CPC to permit the plaintiffs to produce five additional documents which are mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the applications. 7. In the Affidavit of the first plaintiff which is filed in support of I.A.No.13, it is stated that original gift deed dated 09.10.1936 and sale deed dated 27.01.1941 which were misplaced, were traced out recently and the certified copies of the three other documents namely sale deed dated 23.09.1974, sale deed dated 14.09.1976 and sale deed dated 15.05.1986 which are very relevant documents are required to be produced. In addition to the same, permission is also sought to produce copy of the order passed in W.P.No.10182/2018, which was subsequent to the filing of this suit. In the affidavit it is stated that the aforesaid documents are very much necessary to decide the case. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49597 WP No. 32782 of 2018 8. It is not in dispute that the said applications were filed immediately after the plaintiffs evidence was closed and therefore, it cannot be said that there was an inordinate delay on part of the plaintiffs in making a prayer to permit them to produce additional documents. It is trite that parties are required to be given sufficient opportunity to put forward their case, failing which their case is likely to be prejudiced. In the event the prayer made in the applications is allowed, no hardship would be caused to the other side and the inconvenience, if any, caused to them can be compensated monetarily. The Trial Court has failed to appreciate this aspect of the matter and has erred in rejecting I.A.Nos.11 to 13. Therefore, I am of the opinion that order impugned cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 23.06.2018 passed on I.A.Nos.11 to 13 in O.S.No.38/2014 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49597 WP No. 32782 of 2018 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Malur vide Annexure - Q is set aside and the prayer made in the said applications is allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only). The cost shall be paid to the contesting defendants before the Trial Court on the next date of hearing. Since the suit is of the year 2014, the Trial Court shall make efforts to expedite trial and dispose of the suit on merits at the earliest. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KVR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11