- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44482 WP No. 27997 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO.27997 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI SANTHOSHA @ M. SATHYANARAYANA S/O M.Y.MANJEGOWDA AGED 43 YEARS, R/AT MANJUNATHASWAMY BANNI RICE MILL, BOOVANAHALLI CROSS HASSAN-573 201. … PETITIONER (BY SRI.M.H.PRAKASH., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PAVAN T G.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT.GUNAMBA @ HARSHA K D W/O LATE YTAHISHA AGED 32 YEARS 2. JNANAV.M.Y. S/O LATE YATHIHSA, AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS, 3. PRANAV.M.Y. S/O LATE YATHIHSA, AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, RESPONDENT NOS.2 & 3 BEING MINORS REP.BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN GUNAMBA @ HARSHA.K.D. W/O LATE YATHISHA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44482 WP No. 27997 of 2025 R/AT OPPOSITE BRILLIANT SCHOOL, BYPASS ROAD, WILSON GARDEN, HASSAN-573 201. 4. SMT.M.JYOTI @ YAMUNA W/O B.P.CHANDRASHEKAR AGED 42 YEARS R/AT KAMAL PAINT HOUSE SHANKARACHARYA ROAD NEAR SIDDESHWARA DEVASTHANA VIDYA NAGAR HASSAN-573 202 … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SRUTHI CHAGANTI., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.SHEKAR BAADIGER., ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 09.07.25 PASSED BY II ADDL.SR.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HASSAN IN O.S.NO.250/2022 ON I.A. NOS.22 AND 23 VIDE ANNX-F. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondents. 2. The present petition is filed by petitioner/defendant No.1 to set aside the order dated 9.7.2025 passed by the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44482 WP No. 27997 of 2025 learned 2nd Addl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Hassan, in O.S. No.250/2022 on I.A. Nos.22 and 23. 3. The respondents/plaintiffs filed a suit against the petitioner/defendant No.1 and others for the relief of partition and separate possession. The defendant no.1 appeared and filed the written statement on 2.2.2023. After the issues were framed, the Court proceeded to examine PW.1 and thereafter defendant No.1 cross-examined PW.1 in part and the matter was adjourned on several occasions for further cross- examination and vide order dated 18.2.2025, the trial Court noted cross-examination as 'nil'. Thereafter, on 4.3.2025 petitioner/defendant no.1 filed I.A. Nos.20 and 21 for recalling PW.1 for further cross-examination and re-opening the case. The said applications were allowed and the defendant No.1 was directed to conduct further cross-examination on 25.3.2025. When the matter came up before the trial Court on 25.3.2025, petitioner/defendant no.1 again sought time for further cross- examination and the said prayer was rejected. Thereafter, petitioner filed I.A. Nos.22 and 23 to recall PW.1 and to re-open the case for further cross-examination of PW.1. By the impugned order dated 9.7.2025, the trial Court dismissed both - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44482 WP No. 27997 of 2025 the applications by imposing costs of Rs.1,000/- on each of the applications. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner/defendant No.1 is before this Court in the present petition. 4. It is the contention of learned counsel for petitioner that the trial Court is totally unjustified in dismissing the applications filed by the petitioner. The trial Court has not assigned proper reasons for dismissing the applications. Learned counsel submits that lapse on the part of the petitioner is not deliberate and denial of cross-examination of PW.1 amounts to denial of right to substantiate case of the petitioner. Therefore, he seeks one more opportunity to cross- examine PW.1 and submits that prescribed time limit may be fixed by this Court for cross-examination of PW.1. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents/plaintiffs vehemently contends that the present applications - I.A. Nos.22 and 23 filed by petitioner/defendant No.1 are perverse and they are filed with an intention to drag on and protract the proceedings. Learned counsel submits that vide order dated 18.2.2025, the trial Court noted the cross-examination as 'nil' and thereafter, defendant No.1 filed I.A. Nos.20 and 21 to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44482 WP No. 27997 of 2025 recall and re-open the case for further cross-examination of PW.1 and the plaintiff has voluntarily agreed for further cross- examination of PW.1 and accordingly, the said applications were allowed. The present applications - I.A. Nos.22 and 23 are verbatim same as that of I.A. No.20 and 21. Therefore, learned counsel submits that despite providing sufficient opportunity to petitioner/defendant No.1 to cross-examine PW.1, he is protracting the proceedings with an intention to cause delay in disposal of the case. It is further contended that when the matter is in the fag end of the trial, the present applications are filed eventhough defendant No.1 has partly cross-examined PW.1. Therefore, he contends that I.A. Nos.22 and 23 are frivolous applications and no valid reasons are forthcoming to allow the said applications. Therefore, learned counsel seeks to dismiss the said applications. 6. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsels for the parties. 7. It is not in dispute that the suit is filed for the relief of partition and separate possession. The defendant No.1 has contested and filed his written statement. Issues are framed - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44482 WP No. 27997 of 2025 and defendant No.1 has partly cross-examined PW.1. Now, the matter is posted for evidence of defendants. At this stage, petitioner/defendant No.1 filed two applications, one to recall PW.1 and another to re-open the case for cross- examination of PW.1. No doubt, it appears that defendant no.1 is prolonging and protracting the matter for whatsoever reason. However, having heard learned counsels for parties and having regard to the grounds urged in the memorandum of petition, this Court deems it appropriate to afford one more opportunity to the petitioner/defendant No.1 to cross-examine PW.1, by imposing cost. 8. The suit is of the year 2022. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to fix the time frame for completion of cross-examination of PW.1. 9. Accordingly, I pass the following: O R D E R i) The petition is allowed. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44482 WP No. 27997 of 2025 ii) The impugned order dated 9th July 2025 on I.A. Nos.22 and 23 passed by the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Hassan, is hereby set aside. iii) Consequently, I.A. Nos.22 and 23 in O.S. No.250/2022 are allowed. iv) PW.1 is recalled for the purpose of cross- examination by defendant No.1. The petitioner/defendant No.1 is permitted to cross- examine PW.1 within two weeks from the next hearing date i.e, 9.11.2025. Thereafter, the plaintiff is at liberty to cross-examine petitioner/defendant No.1. Both parties shall cooperate for adducing evidence without taking unnecessary adjournments. v) The trial Court is at liberty to impose costs on any of the parties for unnecessary adjournments. vi) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the matter. vii) The trial Court shall make an endeavour to dispose of the matter expeditiously. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44482 WP No. 27997 of 2025 viii) The petitioner shall pay costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) to respondents. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE GSS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25