Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12067 (KAR)

SRI ANIL REDDY v. SMT. SINDHU S

WP/14614/2020 · 2026-02-20

Tara Vitasta Ganju

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10738 WP No. 14614 of 2020 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT PETITION NO. 14614 OF 2020 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. ANIL REDDY AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS S/O SRI. ADINARAYANA REDDY RESIDING AT 820, REBECCA LN, OREFIELD, PEENSYLVANIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. MEENA V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. SINDHU S AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS D/O SRI. SADASHIVA REDDY RESIDING AT NO.307, 7TH MAIN, LAKKASANDRA EXTENSION, WILSON GARDEN, BENGALURU - 560 030. 2. SMT. G.R. VIJAYALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS W/O C. SADASHIVA REDDY RESIDING AT NO.307, 7TH MAIN, LAKKASANDRA EXTENSION, WILSON GARDEN, BENGALURU - 560 030. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10738 WP No. 14614 of 2020 - 2 - 3. SMT. LATHA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS W/O G.R. CHENNAKESHAVA REDDY RESIDING AT NO.185 D AND E, 6TH CROSS, 2ND BLOCK, VISHWAPRIYANAGAR BEGUR, BENGALURU - 560 068. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. VASUNDARA T.P, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SIDDAMALLAPPA P.M, ADVOCAT FOR R1 AND R2; R3 - SERVED) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE INTERIM ORDER DTD 14.09.2020 PASSED BY THE LEARNED XIV ADDL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU IN OS NO.8229/2013 VIDE ANNX-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL ORDER 1. The present petition seeks to challenge an order dated 14.09.2020, passed by Prl. City Civil & Sessions judge, Bangalore in O.S No.8299/2013 (herein referred as Impugned Order). By the Impugned Order, an application HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10738 WP No. 14614 of 2020 - 3 - filed by the petitioner / plaintiff for conducting evidence by Video Conferencing has been dismissed by the learned Trial Court. The learned Trial Court has given a finding that the evidence produced on record does not establish that the petitioner / plaintiff suffers from any kind of permanent disability and thus has dismissed the appeal. 2. This Court has examined the documents filed. The evidence was placed on record by the petitioner/plaintiff includes a Doctor’s Certificate dated 25.11.2019, wherein it is stated that the petitioner/plaintiff is under the active neurological care for lumbar disease and that he is restricting the patient’s travel for 6-8 months or ‘until released by him’. The Doctor’s certificate being brief is extracted below: “Anil Reddy is under my active neurosurgical care for severe lumbar disc disease which dramatically worsened by travel to India in August and September of this year. Therefore, I’am restricting this patient from travel for six to eight months or until released by me.” [Emphasis Supplied] HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10738 WP No. 14614 of 2020 - 4 - 3. However, the learned Trial Court has after reading this Certificate has held that the restriction of travel is only for only for 6-8 months and has thus dismissed the application. 4. After some arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff submits that the petitioner/plaintiff is, even at present suffering from permanent mobility issue and that even today, he cannot travel from the USA to India to get his evidence recorded in this matter. He further submits that if permitted by this court, he would place on record, upto date medical documents. 5. This Court by its order dated 14.12.2020, directed stay of further proceedings before the learned Trial Court. The order has continued as is since then. In the interest of expediency, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that he may be permitted to place fresh documents on record to prove that the mobility of the petitioner is still hampered. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10738 WP No. 14614 of 2020 - 5 - 6. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that she has no objection to this contention, provided, that the respondent is permitted to file or place on record any objections to the fresh application to be filed. 7. Accordingly, and in view of the consensus between the parties, this petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to place complete upto date medical documents in respect of the inability of the petitioner to travel to India from USA. 8. All pending applications are closed. (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE JJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11 Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA