- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35101 WP No. 20668 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 20668 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. K.P. GEETHA RAO W/O LATE K. PRAKASH RAO AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 2. K KRISHNA RAO S/O LATE K. PRAKASH RAO AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 3. K. KRIPA RAO S/O LATE K. PRAKASH RAO AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF DEVASA HOUSE D NO.7-3A, PADIL, MANGALURU - 575 007. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. ANANYA RAI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. S AASMANI BUILDERS PVT. LTD., HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 66/1, INFANTRY ROAD, Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35101 WP No. 20668 of 2025 BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. DAWOOD MOHAMMAD R/AT NO.54, BRIGADE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001 IT IS REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1958. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. BHARATHI M, ADVOCATE FOR C/R) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE LOWER APPELLATE COURT WHICH ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN PASSING OF ORDER ANNEXURE-A. B) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING ORDER DATED 01-04-2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE 1ST ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND C.J.M., MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35101 WP No. 20668 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this court calling in question an order of the First Appellate Court rejecting the miscellaneous application filed by the petitioner on the score of delay. 2. Heard Smt. Ananya Rai, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt. Bharathi M., learned counsel appearing for the caveat / respondent. 3. The petitioners prefer O.S.No.682/2010 seeking injunction against the respondent. The proceeding goes on. The concerned court on 25.04.2015 framed issues or additional issues, as the case would be. Against the order on preliminary issue, the petitioner is said to have approached this court in WP.No.51417/2015. The said writ petition comes to be disposed, reserving liberty to the petitioners to file an appeal. 4. In exercise of the said liberty, the petitioners prefer an appeal on 17.10.2016. The appeal is pending for nine years before the concerned court. The very pendency of nine years for an appeal is appalling. Notwithstanding the pendency of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35101 WP No. 20668 of 2025 issue before the concerned court for nine long years, the concerned court rejects the miscellaneous appeal on the ground that it is preferred on a delay of 312 days. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the application seeking condonation of delay was in clear explanation, as to why delay had accrued. It was on account of pendency of a writ petition in WP.No.51417/2015, before this court. The concerned court has glossed over the issue, ignored the facts and rendered an order that is on the face of it unsustainable, that too after keeping the appeal pending for nine long years. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, the following ORDER (i) Writ petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 01.04.2025 passed by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge & C.J.M., Mangaluru Dakshina Kannada stands quashed. (iii) The appeal is restored to file, to be considered on its merit. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35101 WP No. 20668 of 2025 (iv) All contentions of all the parties shall remain open. Order accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE JY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28 CT: BHK