- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46760 WP No. 33087 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION No. 33087 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. MR. R. NAGARAJA RAO, S/O. LATE. L. RAMACHANDRA RAO, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/A. 550, 1ST MAIN, 2. MR. JAYAVARDHANA N., S/O. R. NAGARAJA RAO, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, 3. MRS. N.TEJASWINI, D/O. R. NAGARAJA RAO, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 4. MRS. N.ASHWINI, D/O. R. NAGARAJA RAO, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS. PETITIONER NOS.1 TO 4 ARE R/A. 550, 1ST MAIN, GOTTIGERE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU-560083. 5. MRS. JAYALAKSHMI, D/O. LATE. L. RAMACHANDRA RAO, W/O. V.RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/A. No.926, Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46760 WP No. 33087 of 2025 RAJANNA COMPLEX, 6TH CROSS, WEAVERS COLONY, GOTTIGERE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU-5600830. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI JAGADEESHWAR J., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MRS. R. SHAILAJA BAI, W/O.LATE.V.CHANDRASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT.No.88/1, 21ST A MAIN, II PHASE, J.P.NAGAR, MARENAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 078. …RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE XXIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, CCH-6 DATED 04.09.2025 ON I.A.No. XIII IN OS.No.5546/2015 AS PER ANNEXURE - F ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46760 WP No. 33087 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL ORDER Heard Sri. J. Jagadeeshwar, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. This writ petition is filed by the defendants seeking to challenge the order on I.A.No.XIII filed under Order XVI Rule 15 and read with Section 151 of CPC, seeking to call for records of admitted signatures of late L.Ramachandra Rao and thumb impression in the registered documents from the office of the Sub-Registrar, Bengaluru South. 3. The suit is for partition. As submitted, no third- party interests are involved. The trial Court, while considering the application, held that DW.1, though having custody of the original sale deeds, failed to produce the same even when directed by the Court, contending that the documents were lost. The trial Court further noticed that the complaint regarding the loss was registered only on 21.03.2025. Since the plaintiff has disputed the signatures on Exs. D.3 and D.4, the trial Court considered it necessary to call for documents containing the admitted signatures of the deceased. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46760 WP No. 33087 of 2025 4. Though learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the claim for partition is baseless and founded on concocted documents, having regard to the fact that the dispute is among family members, the summoning of admitted signatures for comprehensive adjudication cannot be found fault with. The defendant cannot object to summon the admitted signatures on the registered documents when original documents in defendant's custody are not produced before the Court. 5. This Court finds that the order of the trial Court is justified. No demonstrable ground is made out for interference. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE DDU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8