Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10953 (KAR)

ARUN BALLAKUR v. MRS. K NAGARATHNA

WP/1526/2026 · 2026-03-03

H T Narendra Prasad

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1526 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 1315 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) IN WP No. 1526/2026 BETWEEN: 1. ARUN BALLAKUR S/O. LATE MR. B.L.N RAO AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/ AT NO.295, 19TH MAIN 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU 560 095. 2. MS. MADHAVI BALLAKUR W/O. MR. ARUN BALLAKUR AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/ AT NO.295, 19TH MAIN, 6TH BLOCK KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095. REP. BY POA HOLDER MR. ARUN BALLAKUR …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. MAYA HOLLA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MRS. K NAGARATHNA W/O. MR. M. KRISHNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT NO.306, 24TH CROSS 27TH MAIN, HSR SECTOR II BENGALURU - 560 102. Digitally signed by DHANALAKSHMI MURTHY Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 2. MRS. K. PARVATHAMMA W/O. LATE MR. K. CHINNAPPA REDDY AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS 3. MRS. K PADMA W/O. MR. K. ASHWATH REDDY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R2 AND R3 ARE R/OF KONDUR LEPAKSHI MANDAL, HINDUPUR TALUK ANANTPUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH-515 331. 4. ACE FORGE PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.28, BALAJI COMPLEX HOSUR MAIN ROAD BENGALURU 560 068. 5. MR. RANGASWAMY MAJOR 6. MS. VIJAYALAKSHMI W/O MR RANGASWAMY MAJOR 7. MR. R RAVINDRAN S/O MR RANGASWAMY MAJOR 8. MS. R SHOBANA D/O MR RANGASWAMY MAJOR R5 TO R8 ARE R/AT NO. H-36, 8TH CROSS, SHANTINIKETAN, NEW ASDC AT HUDCO, HOSUR, TAMILNADU. 9. MR. M.K. HARISH S/O. MR. M. KRISHNA REDDY - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 10. MS. M K SANDHYA D/O. MR. M. KRISHNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R9 AND R10 ARE R/ AT NO. 306 24TH CROSS, 27TH MAIN, HSR SECTOR 11 BENGALURU-560 102 11. SRI. C. KRISHNA MURTHY S/O. MR. CHINNATHAMBI MAJOR 12. SMT K BHANUMATHI W/O MR C KRISHNA MURTHY MAJOR 13. MR. K GOPINATH S/O MR C KRISHNA MURTHY MAJOR 14. K KAVITHA D/O MR C KRISHNA MURTHY MAJOR R 11 TO R14 ARE R/AT 'KAVITHA,' NO.59A, 30 MAIN, 4TH 'A' CROSS BTM II STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 076. 15. MR. SRINIVASA REDDY S/O. MR. A. RAMA REDDY MAJOR 16. MS. K ASHA W/O. MR. SRINIVASA REDDY MAJOR 17. MR. A RAMA REDDY MAJOR - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 R15 TO R17 ARE R/ AT NO. 713 9TH MAIN, IV BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU 560 034. 18. MR. K. PRASAD S/O. LATE MR. K.M. KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS 19. MS. K KAVITHA W/O MR K PRASAD MAJOR 20. MR. K SRINI S/O LATE MR K M KRISHNAPPA MAJOR 21. MR. K GOPI S/O LATE MR K M KRISHNAPPA MAJOR 22. MS. K USHA D/O LATE MR K M KRISHNAPPA MAJOR R18 TO R22 ARE R/AT 'KRUSUN' NO.182, 9TH MAIN, 7TH SECTOR HSR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 102. 23. MR. A.C. NANJAPPA S/O. MR. A.M. CHITTIAPPA MAJOR 24. MR. A M CHITTAPPA R23 AND 24 ARE R/AT NO. 1120 11TH CROSS, 23RD MAIN, 1 SECTOR HSR LAYOUT, AGARA BENGALURU- 560 102. 25. MR. M. KRISHNA REDDY S/O. MR. M. VENKATA REDDY AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 R/AT NO.306, 24TH CROSS 27TH MAIN, HSR SECTOR II BENGALURU 560 102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K V SATISH., ADVOCATE FOR C/R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 26TH NOVEMBER 2025 (26.11.2025) IN O.S. NO. 9952/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE LXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE- CCH 66, AT BENGALURU (ANNEXURE B) PASSED ON I.A. NO. 8 FILED UNDER SECTION 65(A) AND SECTION 63(C) OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, AND ALLOW I.A. NO. 8 FILED UNDER SECTION 65(A) AND SECTION 63(C) OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 IN O.S. NO. 9952/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE HON BLE LXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE CCH 66, AT BENGALURU AND ETC. IN WP NO. 1315/2026 BETWEEN: 1. MR. ARUN BALLAKUR S/O. LATE MR. B.L.N RAO AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT NO.295, 19TH MAIN 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU 560 095. 2. MS. MADHAVI BALLAKUR W/O. MR. ARUN BALLAKUR AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT NO.295, 19TH MAIN, 6TH BLOCK KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095 REP. BY POA HOLDER-MR. ARUN BALLAKU ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. MAYA HOLLA.,ADVOCATE) - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 AND: 1. MR. M. KRISHNA REDDY S/O. MR. M. VENKATA REDDY AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT NO.306, 24TH CROSS 27TH MAIN, HSR SECTOR II BENGALURU - 560 102. 2. ACE FORGE PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.28, BALAJI COMPLEX, HOSUR MAIN ROAD BENGALURU - 560 068 3. MR. RANGASWAMY MAJOR 4. MS. VIJAYALAKSHMI W/O. MR. RANGASWAMY MAJOR 5. MR. R. RAVINDRAN S/O. MR. RANGASWAMY MAJOR 6. MS. R. SHOBANA D/O. MR. RANGASWAMY MAJOR R3 AND 6 ARE R/AT NO. H-36 8TH CROSS, SHANTINIKETAN NEW ASDC AT HUDCO, HOSUR TAMILNADU 7. MR. M.K. HARISH S/O. MR. M. KRISHNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 8. MS. M.K. SANDHYA D/O. M. KRISHNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R7 AND 8 ARE RESIDING AT NO.306 24TH CROSS, 27TH MAIN, HSR SECTOR II BENGALURU - 560 102. 9. SRI. C. KRISHNA MURTHY S/O. MR. CHINNATHAMBI MAJOR 10. SMT. K. BHANUMATHI W/O. MR. C. KRISHNA MURTHY MAJOR 11. MR. K. GOPINATH S/O. MR. C. KRISHNA MURTHY MAJOR 12. K. KAVITHA D/O. MR. C. KRISHNA MURTHY MAJOR R9 TO R12 ARE R/AT KAVITHA, NO.59A 30 MAIN, 4TH A CROSS BTM II STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 076. 13. MR. SRINIVASA REDDY S/O. MR. A. RAMA REDDY MAJOR 14. MS. K. ASHA W/O. MR. SRINIVASA REDDY MAJOR 15. MR. A. RAMA REDDY MAJOR R13 TO 15 ARE R/AT NO. 713 9TH MAIN, IV BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU- 560 034. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 16. MR. K. PRASAD S/O. LATE MR. K.M. KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS 17. MR. K. SRINI S/O. LATE MR. K.M. KRISHNAPPA 18. MR. K. GOPI S/O. LATE MR. K.M. KRISHNAPPA 19. MS. K. USHA D/O. LATE MR. K.M. KRISHNAPPA MAJOR 20. MS. K. KAVITHA W/O. MR. K. PRASAD MAJOR R16 TO R16 R/AT 'KRUSUN' NO.182 9TH MAIN, 7TH SECTOR HSR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 102. 21. MR. A.C. NANJAPPA S/O. MR. A.M. CHITTIAPPA MAJOR 22. MR. A.M. CHITTAPPA R21 TO 22 ARE R/AT NO. 1120 11TH CROSS, 23RD MAIN, 1 SECTOR HSR LAYOUT, AGARA, BENGALURU- 560 102. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K V SATISH., ADVOCATE FOR C/R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 26TH NOVEMBER 2025 (26.11.2025) IN O.S. NO. 9950/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE LXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE- CCH 66, AT BENGALURU (ANNEXURE -B) PASSED ON I.A. NO. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 12 FILED UNDER SECTION 65 OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, AND I.A. NOS. 13 AND 14 FILED UNDER SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 IN THE SUIT, AND ALLOW I.A. NO. 12 FILED UNDER SECTION 65 OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, AND I.A. NOS. 13 AND 14 FILED UNDER SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 IN O.S. NO. 9950/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE LXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE- CCH 66, AT BENGALURU AND ETC. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER IN W.P.NO.1526/2026 1. In this writ petition, the petitioners-defendant Nos.2 and 3 have called in question the order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the LXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as ‘Trial Court’ for short) on I.A.No.VIII filed under Sections 65(a) and 65(c) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 read with Section 151 of CPC in O.S.No.9952/2015 vide Annexure-B, seeking permission to produce the certified copy of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated 29.12.2002 - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 extracting the same from Ex.D19 in O.S.No.9950/2015. The Trial Court by impugned order dated 26.11.2025 rejected the said I.A.No.VIII. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners–defendant Nos.2 and 3 are before this Court. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners– defendant Nos.2 and 3 submits that the only reason for rejection of I.A.No.VIII was that the author of Ex.D19 i.e. the Truth Lab Report, in respect of the signatures and the handwriting on the alleged photocopy of the MOU dated 29.12.2002, had not been examined in the suit and that the entire evidence of both the sides had been concluded. He further submitted that, subsequent to passing of the said impugned order, the author of Ex.D19 has now been examined. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2- plaintiff No.2 contends that I.A.No.VIII filed by the petitioners itself is not maintainable, as there is no pleading with respect to the MOU. In the absence of such - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 pleading, the question of seeking a direction for production of the document would not arise. He further submitted that, in the written statement filed by the defendants, they have categorically denied the MOU. Therefore, the question of seeking direction for production of the original/certified copy of the MOU would not arise. 4. I have gone through the impugned order dated 26.11.2025. There is no consideration therein in respect of the issues raised by the plaintiffs i.e. respondents herein. The only reason assigned for rejection of the application is that the author of Ex.D19 had not been examined and that the evidence is concluded. Now that the author of Ex.D19 is said to have been examined, the matter therefore, requires reconsideration, taking into account all the contentions raised by both the parties. 5. In view of the above, following order is passed: a) The writ petition is allowed. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 b) The order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the Trial Court on I.A.No.VIII filed under Sections 65(a) and 65(c) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 read with Section 151 of CPC is set aside. c) The parties are directed to advance arguments on I.A.No.VIII on 07.03.2026. d) The Trial Court is directed to hear the arguments of the parties on the said application on 07.03.2026 and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law, within a reasonable time. IN W.P.NO.1315/2026 6. In this writ petition, the petitioners-defendant Nos.2 and 3 have called in question the order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the LXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in O.S.No.9950/2015 on I.A.No.XII filed under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 read with Section 151 of CPC and I.A.Nos.XIII and XIV filed under Section 151 of CPC seeking permission to produce - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 the certified copy of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) being certified copy of Ex.D19-Report of Truth Lab marked in O.S.No.9950/2015, and further to recall the order dated 05.08.2025 for closing the defendants’ evidence, and to reopen the evidence of defendant Nos.2 and 3, respectively. The Trial Court by impugned order dated 26.11.2025 rejected I.A.Nos.XII to XIV. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners–defendant Nos.2 and 3 are before this Court. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners– defendant Nos.2 and 3 submits that the only reason for rejection of I.A.Nos.XII to XIV was that the author of Ex.D19 had not been examined in respect of the report/opinion of Truth Lab in respect of the signatures and the handwriting on the alleged photocopy of the MOU dated 29.12.2002 and that the entire evidence of both the sides had been concluded. He further submitted that, subsequent to passing of the impugned order, the author of Ex.D19 has now been examined. - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2- plaintiff No.2 contends that I.A.Nos.XII to XIV filed by the petitioners itself are not maintainable, as there is no pleading with respect to the MOU. In the absence of such pleading, the question of seeking a direction for production of the document would not arise. He further submitted that, in the written statement filed by the defendants, they have categorically denied the MOU. Therefore, the question of seeking direction for production of the original or certified copy of MOU would not arise. 9. I have gone through the impugned order dated 26.11.2025. There is no consideration therein in respect of the issues raised by the plaintiffs i.e. the respondents herein. The only reason assigned for rejection of the application is that the author of Ex.D19 had not been examined and that the evidence had been concluded. Now, that the author of Ex.D19 is said to have been examined, the matter, therefore, requires reconsideration, taking into account all the contentions raised by both parties. - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12943 WP No. 1526 of 2026 C/W WP No. 1315 of 2026 10. In view of the above, following order is passed: a) The writ petition is allowed. b) The order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the Trial Court on I.A.Nos.XII to XIV in O.S.No.9950/2015 is set aside. c) The parties are directed to advance arguments on I.A.Nos.XII to XIV on 07.03.2026. d) The Trial Court is directed to hear the arguments of the parties on the said applications on 07.03.2026 and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law, within a reasonable time. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE HA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4