- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31740 WP No. 18895 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 18895 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. A.M. SAHAS S/O LATE SRI. MAHADEVAPPA M AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 210/F13 UTTARADHI MUTT STREET, EAST 5TH CROSS, FORT MOHALLA, MYSORE - 570 004. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANGAMESH R.B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. K.S. KUSUMA W/O LATE SRI. MAHADEVAPPA M AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 210/F13 UTTARADHI MUTT STREET, EAST 5TH CROSS, FORT MOHALLA, MYSURU - 570 004. 2. SRI SANDESH A M S/O LATE SRI MAHADEVAPPA M, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 507 Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31740 WP No. 18895 of 2024 H.M. WORLD CITY APARTMENT, RAGHAVANPALYA, J.P. NAGAR IX PHASE, BENGALURU - 560 062. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KRISHNAMOORTHY D, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 AND R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DTD 21.03.24 PASSED ON IA NO. 5 FILED UNDER 16 RULE 6 AND 7 R/W SECTION 151 CPC RESPECTIVELY IN OS NO. 371/20, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED I ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MYSURU ANNEXURE-E AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this court calling in question an order dated 21.03.2024, which rejects the application filed by the petitioner under Order XVI Rules 6 and 7 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('the CPC' for short) seeking conduct of examination-in-chief and cross-examination that was not conducted during the proceedings. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31740 WP No. 18895 of 2024 2. Heard Shri Sangamesh R.B. learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Krishnamoorthy D. learned counsel appearing for caveat - respondent Nos.1 and 2. 3. Facts in brief germane are as follows: On the death of husband of the plaintiff and the father of plaintiff No.2, a suit comes to be instituted for partition and separate possession of the joint family properties in O.S.No.371/2020. The suit is instituted on 20.06.2020. A written statement is also preferred along with a counter claim by the defendant - petitioner. Examination-in-chief of PW1 and his cross-examination gets concluded between the dates 21.09.2021 to 18.08.2023. After the conclusion of the cross examination of PW1, the defendant - petitioner prefers an application under Order XVI Rules 6 and 7 of the CPC seeking permission to cross-examine the PW1. The matter was posted for objections on the said application. No objections are filed by the plaintiff. The concerned court rejects the application. It is therefore, the petitioner is before this court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31740 WP No. 18895 of 2024 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend that he was not given any opportunity to place his evidence by way of examination-in-chief, nor was permitted cross-examination. Therefore, it would be a case of no rebuttal evidence at all. 5. A perusal at the records would clearly vindicate the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. In fact, there is no cross examination permitted even examination-in-chief, in accordance with law. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that opportunity was granted and should not be permitted again, but would however admit the fact that there was no liberty to cross-examine permitted and truncated opportunity of examination-in-chief. 7. In the light of the aforesaid circumstance that there is no evidence from the hands of the defendant by examination- in-chief or cross-examination and court has closed the defence evidence, I deem it appropriate to grant an opportunity to the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31740 WP No. 18895 of 2024 petitioner - defendant to tender his evidence and also cross- examine the PW1. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, the following ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 21.03.2024 stands quashed. (iii) The application so filed by the petitioner stands allowed. (iv) The examination-in-chief and cross- examination that is not conducted today, shall be conducted in accordance with law. (v) It shall be seen by the concerned court that on the garb of examination-in-chief and cross- examination, the proceedings should not be dragged. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE JY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23