- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40105 CRP No. 38 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 38 OF 2025 (M) BETWEEN: SUBRAMNAYA V SHET S/O VAMAN. V. SHET, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, BUSINESSMEN, R/AT PADMAVATHI JEWELRY WORKS, MAIN ROAD, BOMMANAKATTE, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK - 577 204. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KETHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: V. BALAJI S/O VENKATACHALAPATI, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, PEETY SHOP OWNER, R/AT NO.307, 2ND CROSS, SHRIGANDHA NAGAR, YAJNAHALLI, PEENYA II STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 091 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B.S. PRASAD, ADVOCATE) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SEC.115 OF CPC., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 07.12.2024 PASSED IN MISC NO.11/2020 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40105 CRP No. 38 of 2025 SHIVAMOGGA., ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 9 RULE 13 OF CPC., TO SET ASIDE THE EXPARTE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE PASSED IN OS NO.617/2017 DATED 20.03.2019. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri.Kethan Kumar, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri.B.S.Prasad, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Plaintiff is the revision petitioner challenging the order passed in Misc. Petition No.11/2020 on the file of II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Shivamogga allowing the petition by order dated 07.12.2024 filed under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC and restoring the suit in O.S.No.617/2017 by setting aside the ex-parte judgment dated 20.03.2019. 3. The main grievance of learned counsel for the revision petitioner is that the petition filed by the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40105 CRP No. 38 of 2025 respondent/defendant before the Trial Court in Misc. Petition No.11/2020 was admittedly barred by limitation having regard to the date of order and date of filing of the petition less the periods spent in obtaining the certified copy of the ex-parte judgment. 4. No doubt, from the material available on record, it appears that the Miscellaneous Petition filed by the respondent is barred by limitation and there was no application filed seeking condonation of delay. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent would however contend that it is the mistake on the part of learned counsel for the defendant who filed Miscellaneous Petition not noticing that the period of limitation for filing the petition under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC is only 30 days and since the office had not raised any objection nor there was an issue with regard to the question of limitation, the matter was proceeded and learned Trial Judge passed the order and therefore, in the larger interest of justice, impugned order be upheld. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40105 CRP No. 38 of 2025 6. Having heard the arguments of both the parties, this Court noticed that only course that is left open for this Court is to remit the matter to the Trial Court for fresh adjudication after reserving the liberty for the revision petitioner to file an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The same would further delay the adjudication of the suit which came to be admittedly decreed ex-parte. 7. In order to do complete justice in the attendant facts and circumstances of the case, remitting the matter to the Trial Court for fresh adjudication of the Miscellaneous Petition after permitting the defendant to file the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act would result in further delay of adjudication of the suit. 8. Taking note of the same, if sum of Rs.5,000/- is imposed as cost and uphold the order of the Trial Court in Miscellaneous Petition No.11/2020 and direct the respondent/defendant to participate in the suit and suit if ordered to be expedited, ends of justice would be met. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40105 CRP No. 38 of 2025 9. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of. ii. Respondent/defendant shall file written statement if not already filed on the very next date of hearing and on the condition of payment of cost of Rs.5,000/-. iii. Thereafter, learned Trial Judge shall frame the issues and dispose of the suit as early as possible. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44