- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28134-DB RFA No. 1677 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1677 OF 2023 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. HARIKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS S/O LATE C. SAMPANGI 2. SMT. BHUVANA @ S. BHUVESHWARI AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS D/O LATE C. SAMPANGI BOTH ARE R/AT. No.2763 13TH MAIN, "E" BLOCK 2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGARA BENGALURU-560 010 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. PRASAD K.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. KUPPUSWAMY AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS S/O LATE C. SAMPANGI R/AT No.2763/56, 13TH MAIN "E" BLOCK, 2ND STAGE RAJAJINAGARA BENGALURU-560 010 2. SRI. BABU AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS Digitally signed by CHANNEGOWDA PREMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28134-DB RFA No. 1677 of 2023 S/O LATE C. SAMPANGI R/AT No.2763, 13TH MAIN "E" BLOCK, 2ND STAGE RAJAJINAGARA BENGALURU-560 010 3. S. GAYATHRIDEVI AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS W/O SRINIVAS RESIDING IN PORTION OF No.2763, 13TH MAIN "E" BLOCK, 2ND STAGE RAJAJINAGARA BENGALURU-560 010 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. CHIDANANDA P., ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; NOTICE TO R3 IS DISPENSED WITH V.O. DATED 24.04.2025) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 04.01.2019 PASSED IN OS No.8511/2015 ON THE FILE OF XLII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH No.43), DISMISSING THE APPEAL SUIT FOR PARTITION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28134-DB RFA No. 1677 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 04.01.2019 of the XLII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, at Bengaluru City (CCH No.43) in O.S. No.8511/2015. 2. We have heard Shri. Prasad K.R. Rao, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Shri. Chidananda. P, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2. Respondent No.1 is served and remained unrepresented and notice to respondent No.3 is dispensed with vide order dated 24.04.2025. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that appellants No.1 and 2 herein are the defendants No.2 and 3 before the Trial Court and that for point of production of documents, the partition suit was dismissed. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants have the required documents in their possession and that the documents could not be produced before the Trial Court, the appellants were under the impression that the documents would be produced by the plaintiff/respondent No.1. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28134-DB RFA No. 1677 of 2023 Though notice had been taken out to the respondents in this appeal, there is no appearance on their behalf. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that if the matter is remanded, the appellants shall produce the necessary documents before the Trial Court and the matter can be considered on merits. 5. In view of the fact that the appellants specifically contend that they are in possession of the documents and it can be produced before the Trial Court, if the matter has been remanded, we are of the opinion that one opportunity can be given to the parties to produce the documents and adduce evidence in the instant case. 6. In the result, (i) The appeal is allowed. (ii) The judgment dated 04.01.2019 of the XLII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, at Bengaluru City(CCH No.43) in O.S. No.8511/2015, is set aside. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28134-DB RFA No. 1677 of 2023 (iii) The matter is remanded to the Trial Court for a consideration on merits. In case, the parties take the stand and produce the required documents, the matter shall be considered and disposed of at the earliest. (iv) The appellants are directed to mark appearance before the Trial Court on 20.08.2025 and produce the necessary evidence. In case, the appellants do not appear before the Court and do not adduce necessary evidence without undue delay, the Trial Court is free to dispose of the suit. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE RAK,List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11