- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1386 WP No. 200481 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.200481 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. DEVAMMA KAMBLI W/O LATE MALLAPPA, AGE: 82 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, 2. SMT. PADMA W/O SHARANAPPA KAMBLI, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, 3. SHIVARAJAPPA KAMBLI S/O SHARANAPPA, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 4. DHANRAJ KAMBLI S/O SHARANAPPA, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 5. PAMPAPATHI S/O SHARANAPPA KAMBLI, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 6. LINGARAJ S/O SHARANAPPA KAMBLI, AGE 34 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, 7. RAJAMMA D/O SHARANAPPA, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, 8. LAXMI D/O SHARANAPPA, AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, ALL ARE R/O SINGAPUR VILLAGE, TALUK: SINDHANUR, Digitally signed by RENUKA Location: High Court Of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1386 WP No. 200481 of 2025 DIST: RAICHUR-584126. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI MAHANTESH PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHARANAPPA KAMBLI S/O LATE MALLAPPA, AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 2. DEVENDRAPPA S/O LATE HANMANTHAPPA, AGE; 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 3. SMT. SAVITRAMMA W/O EARAPPA BARGUR, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, ALL ARE R/O SINGAPUR VILLAGE, TALUK: SINDHANUR, DIST: RAICHUR-584126. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.01.2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SINDHANUR, ON AN APPLICATION U/O 9 RULE 4 OF CPC IN CIVIL MISC.NO.7/2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE CIVIL MISC.NO.7/2020 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1386 WP No. 200481 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ) The petitioners have challenged an order dated 10.01.2023, passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindhanur in Civil Miscellaneous No.7/2020, by which, their application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 was rejected. 2. The petitioners had filed O.S.No.27/2012 for partition and separate possession of their share in the suit schedule properties. The said suit was dismissed for default on 01.02.2014. Long thereafter, an application was filed by the plaintiffs to restore the suit and an application was also filed for condonation of delay in filing the application for restoration of the suit. The said application was dismissed vide impugned order. Being aggrieved by the said order, the plaintiffs are before this Court. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1386 WP No. 200481 of 2025 3. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs submitted that the petitioners had sought for substantive relief and therefore the Court must have considered condonation of delay sympathetically. He however contends that in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Prem Kishore and others Vs. Brahm Prakash and others1, he is entitled to file a fresh suit for partition since the earlier suit was not decided on merits. 4. In view of the aforesaid submission, no intervention is warranted with the impugned order. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed. It is open for the plaintiffs to file a fresh suit in accordance with law. Sd/- (R.NATARAJ) JUDGE RSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32 1 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 266