- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34834 WP No. 6503 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 6503 OF 2023 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI N.DEVARAO S/O NARASING RAO AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT NO.115, 2ND CROSS 1ST ‘A’ MAIN, R.R. LAYOUT NAGADEVANAHALLI BENGALURU - 560 056. …PETITIONER (BY SRI B.RAMESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. C.P.DHANANJAY S/O LATE R.PUTTASWAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT NO. 17, NEEMADI NILAYA 11TH CROSS ROAD, BALAJI LAYOUT MALLATHAHALLI, JNANA BHARATHI POST BENGALURU - 560 056. 2. M/S. INDIA BULLS HOUSING FINANCE LTD., HAVING THEIR REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 87/6, RICHMOND ROAD RICHMOND TOWER BENGALURU - 560 025 REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34834 WP No. 6503 of 2023 REPRESENTED BY MANAGER. 3. M/S. P.N.B.HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED HAVING THEIR REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.5, MATHRUSHREE ARCADE 2ND FLOOR, 100 FT RING ROAD BENGALURU - 560 025 REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY REPRESENTED BY MANAGER 4. SRI NAGARAJA S/O SRI SACHIDANANDA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT NO.486, 1ST FLOOR WOC ROAD, 2ND STAGE 2ND PHASE, BENGALURU - 560 086. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI N.DINESH RAO, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DTD 18.08.2022 PASSED IN IA FILED UNDER ORDER XXIII RULE 1 OF CPC IN OS NO.26126/2021 ON THE FILE OF 74TH ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-75) MAYO HALL AT BENGALURU IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNX-J. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34834 WP No. 6503 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner – plaintiff is before this Court seeking the following prayer: “a. To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari by quashing the order dated 18.08.2022 passed in IA filed under Order XXIII Rule 1 of CPC in OS No.26126/2021 on the file of 74th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-75), Mayo Hall, at Bengaluru is produced and marked as ANNEXURE-'J'. b. To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus by permitting the petitioner to prosecute the suit bearing OS No.26126/2021 on the file of 74th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-75), Mayo Hall, at Bengaluru on merits c. To pass such other orders as this Hon'ble court deems fit to be granted in the facts and circumstance of the case in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Heard Sri B. Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N. Dinesh Raod, learned counsel for the caveator - respondent No.1. 3. The parties to the lis were before this Court in R.F.A.50/2020. In R.F.A.No.50/2020, the petitioner makes a submission that he would wish to withdraw the suit. The co- - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34834 WP No. 6503 of 2023 ordinate bench records the said submission in terms of the order dated 01.08.2022. It reads as follows: “Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant wants to withdraw the suit in the trial Court. Re-list this matter on 10.08.2022. Xxxxx” Accordingly, the petitioner files an application before the concerned Court under Order XXIII Rule 1 of the CPC and the application reads as follows: “APPLICATION FILED UNDER ORDER XXIII RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE The applicant/plaintiff above named respectfully prayed that for the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit this Hon'ble court may be pleased to permit the applicant/plaintiff to withdraw the above suit with a liberty to approach this Hon'ble court on the same cause of action if need arises in the interest of justice and equity. BENGALURU sd/- DATE: 18.8.2022 ADVOCATE FOR APPLICANT/PLAINTIFF.” The application is supported by an affidavit. Paragraph No.8 of the affidavit that is germane to be noticed, reads as follows: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34834 WP No. 6503 of 2023 “8. I submit that, after I taking necessary legal opinion I have filed the accompanying application seeking for withdrawal of the accompanying suit with a liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action if need arises in future or after disposal of RFA No.50/2020 as my valuable right, title and interest over the suit schedule property would be deprived as the defendant No.1 himself in his cross examination in OS No.4401/2017 has admitted that he had created the documents and making a claim in respect of site No.242/A belonging to me as site No.240.” (Emphasis added) The concerned Court considering the application passes an order on 18.08.2022. It reads as follows: “Sri MGC Adv filed Vakalath for Defendant No.3 alongwith Power of Attorney. Counsel for Plaintiff filed Appl U/o 23 r 1 of CPC. Perused. Allowed. The Plaintiff is permitted to withdraw the above suit as per the undertaking given by Plaintiff in RFA No.50/2020. Accordingly the suit is closed as withdrawn.” In terms of the undertaking rendered by the petitioner in R.F.A.No.50/2020, the suit was permitted to be withdrawn. No liberty is reserved to file a fresh suit. It is therefore, the petitioner is before this Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34834 WP No. 6503 of 2023 4. The co-ordinate bench of this Court after hearing the parties at length on 24.09.2024, had passed the following order: “Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a plain reading of the application filed under Order XXIII Rule 1 of CPC at Annexure-H, it is clear that the plaintiff sought to withdraw the suit with liberty to approach the court on the same cause of action, if need arises. Attention of this Court is drawn to the affidavit filed along with the application where in paragraph No.8 it is clearly stated that the plaintiff was seeking liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action, if required. However, the learned counsel submits that if this Court would grant leave to the plaintiff he would file necessary application before the trial court in this regard. Leave as sought for is granted.” (Emphasis supplied) In terms of the afore-quoted order, the co-ordinate bench reserved liberty to the petitioner to file a necessary application before the concerned Court, if he would so desire. In terms of the liberty granted, the petitioner has already preferred an application on 21.11.2024, which is pending consideration. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that on the pretext of filing statement of objections, the matter has been adjourned on close to 18 occasions. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34834 WP No. 6503 of 2023 6. In the light of the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to direct the concerned Court to dispose the application so filed in terms of the order dated 24.09.2024, within an outer limit of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Objections, if not filed by then, it shall be filed by the respondents. On the pretext of filing of objections, no further adjournment shall be granted by the concerned Court. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, leaving open all the contentions of the petitioner and the respondents to be urged before the concerned Court, the petition stands disposed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE NVJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6 CT:SS