- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23585 WP No. 7011 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7011 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SUNDARI POOJARTHI W/O. LATE BHOJA POOJARY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT. SENARABETTU MANE, KERVASHE VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574 104 2. SMT. SHASHIKALA D/O. LATE BHOJA POOJARY AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT. SENARABETTU MANE, KERVASHE VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574104 3. SMT. JAYASHREE D/O. LATE BHOJA POOJARY AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT. SENARABETTU MANE, KERVASHE VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574104 4. SMT.VIJAYA D/O BHOJA POOJARY Digitally signed by DHANALAKSHMI MURTHY Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23585 WP No. 7011 of 2026 AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT .SENARABETTU MANE, KERVASHE VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574 104 5. SRI. UDAYA S/O. LATE BHOJA POOJARY AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT. SENARABETTU MANE, KERVASHE VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574 104 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAJARAMA S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. JALAJA POOJARTHI AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, D/O. LATE SEETHU POOJARTHI, R/AT. PADDAIBAILU, MIYAR VILLAGE AND POST, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT- 2. SMT.SHYAMALA D/O LATE KARIYADU POOJARTHI AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/AT. PADDAIBAILU HOUSE, MIYAR VILLAGE AND POST, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574104 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23585 WP No. 7011 of 2026 3. SMT. PUSHPAVATHI D/O. LATE KARIYADU POOJARTHI AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT. PADDAIBAILU HOUSE, MIYAR VILLAGE AND POST, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574104 4. SMT. BABY D/O. LATE KARIYADU POOJARTHI AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT. PADDAIBAILU HOUSE, MIYAR VILLAGE AND POST, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574104 5. SMT. SUMATHI D/O. LATE KARIYADU POOJARTHI AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT. PADDAIBAILU HOUSE, MIYAR VILLAGE AND POST, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574104 6. SRI. MAHABALA S/O. LATE KARIYADU POOJARTHI AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT. PADDAIBAILU HOUSE, MIYAR VILLAGE AND POST, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574104 7. SMT. VIJAYA D/O. LATE KARIYADU POOJARTHI AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23585 WP No. 7011 of 2026 R/AT. PADDAIBAILU HOUSE, MIYAR VILLAGE AND POST, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574104 8. SRI.SUDHAKARA S/O. LATE KARIYADU POOJARTHI AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT. PADDAIBAILU HOUSE, MIYAR VILLAGE AND POST, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-574104 9. SRI. SURESHA S/O. LATE VANAJA POOJARTHI AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 10. SRI KARUNAKARA S/O. LATE VANAJA POOJARTHI AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 11. SMT.ARUNA D/O LATE VANAJA POOJARTHI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS FILED PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON IA NO.XVIII DATED 11.02.2026 IN O.S. NO. 83/2015 PASSED BY THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC UDUPI VIDE ANNEXURE-G IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23585 WP No. 7011 of 2026 ORAL ORDER 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has called in question the order dated 11.02.2026 passed by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Karkala, Udupi (for short 'Trial Court') on I.A.No.XVIII filed under Order 18 Rule 17 and Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (for short, ‘CPC’) in O.S.No.83/2015, whereby the said application to reopen the evidence of the defendant No.11 and to recall DW.2 for further cross-examination has been dismissed. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Trial Court in Original Suit. 3. The plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.83/2015 before the Trial Court for declaration. On appearance, the defendants appeared through counsel and filed a written statement. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, Trial Court framed the issues. The matter was posted for evidence. On completion of the evidence of the plaintiff, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23585 WP No. 7011 of 2026 defendant No.2 was examined in-chief. When it was posted for cross-examination, defendant Nos.8 to 12/ petitioners herein have filed a memo stating that they do not wish to lead any further evidence and requested the Court to post this matter for arguments. After accepting that memo, the matter was posted for arguments of defendant Nos.8 to 12. At this stage, defendant Nos.8 to 12 filed this application I.A.No.XVIII to reopen the evidence of the defendant No.11 and to recall DW.2 for further cross-examination. 4. Viewed from any angle, there is no error or illegality in the order passed by the Trial Court. The trial Court is justified in rejecting the application. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9