PARASAPPA S/O BHIMAPPA NAYAK v. KALAVATI W/O. RAYAPPA RAGHONI
WP/102866/2024 · 2025-12-12
Anant Ramanath Hegde
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 85339 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 85339 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18128 WP No. 102866 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 102866 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. PARASAPPA S/O. BHIMAPPA NAYAK, SINCE DECEASED BY LR’S.,
GANGAWWA W/O. PARASAPPA NAYAK, SINCE DECEASED BY LR’S.,
SINDHU W/O. SHIVANAIK NAYAK, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: HOMEMAKER, R/O: BIRANAL VILLAGE–591 317, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI. SHEELA W/O. MUTTAPPA YOGAPPANAVAR, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOMEMAKER, R/O: NARASAPUR VILLAGE–587 155, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOTE. SAKKUBAI W/O. MAHADEV NUNGARI, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOMEMAKER, R/O: KALAS VILLAGE–587 155, TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOTE. SAVITA W/O. CHINNAPPA PUJARI, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOMEMAKER, R/O: JAMBAGI VILLAGE–591 232, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOTE. SARITA W/O. DUNDAPPA KURUBETTI, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: HOMEMAKER, R/O: KOLUR VILLAGE–591 232, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOTE. SHASHIKALA W/O. ANAND KURUBETTI, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOMEMAKER, R/O: JAKANUR VILLAGE–587 301,
CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.12.17 12:04:04 +0530
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18128 WP No. 102866 of 2024
7. TQ: JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOTE. SANIYA W/O. SHASHIDHAR KURUBETTI, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: HOMEMAKER, R/O: KOLUR VILLAGE–591 232, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOTE. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. C.S. SHETTAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. KALAVATI W/O. RAYAPPA RAGHONI, AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: JAMBAGI BK–587 301, TQ: JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOTE. 2. MANJULA W/O. GANGAPPA KURUBETTI, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: HOMEMAKER, R/O: JAKANUR–587 301, TQ: JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOTE. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.
PRASHANT S. KADADEVAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, JAMKHANDI IN O.S.
NO.126/2010 DATED 27-04-2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND THEREBY;
ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THESE PETITIONERS IN I.A.
NO.13 FILED UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC SEEKING TO REOPEN THE CASE VIDE ANNEXURE-D; ALL THE APPLICATION FILED BY THESE PETITIONERS IN I.A. NO.14 FILED U/O. XVI RULE 6 R/W. SECTION 151 OF CPC SEEKING FOR ISSUANCE OF WITNESS SUMMONS TO THE TAHASILDAR TO PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL VARDHI PERTAINING TO MR NO.H4/2012-13 VIDE ANNEXURE-E; ALLOW I.A. NO.15 FILED UNDER SECTION 75 OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT R/W. ORDER XXVI RULE 10 R/W. SECTION 151 OF CPC SEEKING TO SEND THE DISPUTED SIGNATURE FOR COMPARISON WITH THE ADMITTED SIGNATURES OF THESE PETITIONERS IN O.S. NO.126/2010 VIDE ANNEXURE-F.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18128 WP No. 102866 of 2024
ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)
This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the orders dated 27.04.2024 passed on I.A.Nos.13 to 15 in O.S.No.126/2010 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Jamkhandi. 2. I.A.No.13 was filed seeking reopening of the case. I.A.No.14 was filed to summon the original Varadi said to have been in the custody of the Tahsildar. I.A.No.15 was filed to refer the said Varadi for forensic examination. 3. These applications were filed by defendants No.1(c) to 1(i). The plaintiff did not file any objection to the said applications. The Trial Court, however, dismissed the applications on the premise that the suit is of the year 2010, whereas the applications were filed in the year 2024. 4.
The Court is not convinced with the reasons assigned by the Trial Court. When the parties intended to produce evidence in support of their contentions, and the contesting party did not file any objection, the Trial Court ought to have allowed
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18128 WP No. 102866 of 2024
the applications, since the document pertains to the suit properties. 5. Hence, the following: ORDER a) The petition is allowed. b) I.A.Nos.13 to 15 filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, are allowed. c) The Trial Court shall take further steps to secure the original records and obtain the expert's opinion as prayed. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE
PMP CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 68