- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32563 WP No. 20303 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 20303 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. 2. SRI.S. CHELUVEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 90 YEARS, S/O SEETHARAMEGOWDA, R/AT NO.16, MARIGUDI STREET, KUMBARABEEDI, KUMBAR KOPPAL VILLAGE, MYSURU-570002, S.RAMEGOWDA, S/O LATE SEETHARAMEGOWDA, SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS. SRI. JAYARAM, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, S/O LATE S. RAMEGOWDA, R/AT #19, KUMBARA BEEDI, KUMBARA KOPPAL, MYSURU-570002. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B.S. NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32563 WP No. 20303 of 2025 AND: 1. THE CHIEF SECRETARY, THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MYSURU DISTRICT, MYSURU-570001. THE 1ST APPELLANT IS REPRESENTED BY THE 2ND APPELLANT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI M. RAO, HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, OR ORDER TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 03.04.2025, PASSED IN R.A.NO.187 AND 188/2022, ON I.A. NO.1 BY THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT MYSORE, COPIES SUBMITTED AT ANNEXURES-A AND A1 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32563 WP No. 20303 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri.B.S.Nagaraj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Smt.Rashmi M.Rao, learned HCGP appearing for the respondents and have perused the material on record. 2. Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S.Nos.366 and 377/2002 which culminate into passing of a decree dated 8.2.2021. The said judgment and decree is challenged by the State before the First Appellate Court in R.A.Nos.187 and 188/2022. In the said appeal, application is preferred by the State under Section 5 of the Limitation Act on which the order which reads as follows is placed: "The case is set down for order on IA 1 - filed U/s 5 of the Limitation Act seeking to condone the delay of about 360 days; since the learned counsel for respondent insisted for the disposal of IA 1 on merits. Hence, both sides were heard. However, an order on IA 1 - seeking to condone the delay, can be disposed off on merits only after an enquiry in the matter. Hence, it would be just and proper to post the case for enquiry on IA 1. Enquiry on IA 1 by 10.06.2025." - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32563 WP No. 20303 of 2025 3. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners are before this Court inter alia on the score that the State is not appearing before the Court after filing of appeal and the rights of the petitioners-plaintiffs are hanging in balance. Learned counsel would further submit that in the light of the suit being of the year 2002 and the suit being in appeal in 2022, I deem it appropriate to infuse finality to the proceedings and direct the Appellate Court to dispose R.A.Nos.187 and 188/2022 within an outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 4. It is needless to observe that the State shall ensure representation before the concerned Court as they are the appellants. In the event, they would not represent, the Court is at liberty to pass necessary orders. Ordered accordingly and Writ Petition is disposed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE CBC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 99