- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45968 CRP No. 295 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 295 OF 2023 (M) BETWEEN: SRI. R. NIGAR SULTANA W/O SRI LIYAKAT ALI KHAN, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT NO.63, KHAZI STREET, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU - 560 004 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NANDISH GOWDA G.B, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. MOHAMMED KHALEEL S/O SRI MOHAMMED HAYATH, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT VARDA MILL ROAD, N.R. EXTENSION, CHINTAMANI -563 125, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. A. VIJAYA SAI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE SMALL CAUSES COURTS ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25.03.2023 PASSED IN MISC.NO.15002/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND 24TH ACMM SCCH-20, MAYOHALL UNIT, BANGALORE, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER IX RULE 13 R/W SEC.151 OF CPC. Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45968 CRP No. 295 of 2023 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER The petitioner in S.C.No.15181/2014 is the revision petitioner challenging the order passed in Miscellaneous Case No.15002/2020 whereby the Trial Court allowed the application filed under Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 of CPC and directed the office to restore Misc.Petition No.15014/2018. 2. However, while so allowing, the Trial Court did not consider the hardship to petitioner and did not impose any costs on the respondent in this revision petition, who is also the respondent in the original proceedings as well. The said order is assailed in this revision petition. 3. After addressing the arguments for sometime, Sri Nandish Gowda.G.B. would submit that all necessary defence be made available for the petitioner to urge in the pending proceedings. He also contended that reasonable amount of cost may be imposed owing to the conduct of the respondent. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45968 CRP No. 295 of 2023 4. It is noticed that while exercising the discretion, the learned Trial Judge has not imposed any cost. 5. Hence, the following: ORDER i. The revision petition stands allowed-in-part. ii. While maintaining the restoration of Misc.No.15014/2018, the respondent is directed to pay a sum of ₹10,000/- as cost. iii. Further, the payment of cost is condition precedent for the respondent to further participate in the proceedings; iv. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53