- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9988 WP No. 33437 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 33437 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI.H.M.SHIVAPRAKASH SON OF H M THIPPESWAMY AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 28 SNEHA ARCADE MLA LAYOUT LOTTEGOLLAHALLI R M V 2ND STAGE BENGALURU-560 094 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ABHISHEK GOWDA A.H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT.DEVEERAMMA WIFE OF LATE M JAYAMMA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDENT OF GAREHATTI NEAR RAILWAY STATION CHITRADURGA-577 501 2. DR H M VIJAYKUMAR SON OF H M THIPPESWAMY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 28 SNEHA ARCADE MLA LAYOUT LOTTEGOLLAHALLI R M V 2ND STAGE BENGALURU-560 094 3. H M VEERENDRAKUMAR SON OF H M THIPPESWAMY AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS NO. 87-2 SIR LOU DRIVE BRAMPTON CANADA LAYOUT, REP. BY HIS SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9988 WP No. 33437 of 2025 DR H M VIJAY KUMAR 4. SMT H M MANJULA DAUGHTER OF H M THIPPESWAMY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS NO. 204, N J NEST 4TH CROSS R M V 3RD STAGE LOTTEGOLLAHALLI BENGALURU-560 094 5. H M KAVYASHREE DAUGHTER OF LATE H M RAVISHANKAR AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 6. H M RISIKESH SON OF LATE H M RAVISHANKAR AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RESPONDENT NO.5 AND 6 ARE R/AT FLAT NO. 8312 B BLOCK DHANUSH ENCLAVE RAMAIAH LAYOUT ROAD OPPOSIT BEST VOUNTY BUS STOP M S PALYA VIDYARANYAPURA BENGALUIRU-560 097 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SIDDAPPA B M.,ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO WHEREFORE THE PETITIONER MOST HUMBLY PRAYS THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAYBE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.08.2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF 1ST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT CHITRADURGA IN OS NO.458/2014 IN I.A NO.21 IN ANNEUXRE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9988 WP No. 33437 of 2025 ORAL ORDER This petition by plaintiff No.2 in O.S.No.458/2014 is directed against the impugned order dated 23.08.2025 passed by the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Chitradurga (for short “the Trial Court”), whereby the application, I.A.No.21 filed by the petitioner- plaintiff No.2, under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC to strike out issue Nos.1 to 3 and frame additional issues was rejected by the Trial Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the aforesaid suit filed by the petitioner-plaintiff No.2 against the defendants for recovery of possession and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule property is being contested by the respondents-defendants. After commencement of trial, the petitioner-plaintiff No.2 filed the instant application seeking striking off of issue Nos.1 to 3 and for framing of certain additional issues and the said application having been rejected by the Trial Court, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prayer/request made in I.A.No.21 may be restricted to directing the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9988 WP No. 33437 of 2025 Trial Court to frame the following two additional issues and I.A.No.21 may be partly allowed in favour of the petitioner-plaintiff No.2: “1. Whether the plaintiffs prove that, they are entitled for possession of the schedule property from the Defendant? 2. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for damages and mesne profit and future mesne profits?” 5. In this context it is pertinent to note that the proposed Issue Nos.1 and 2 referred to supra arise out of the pleading of the parties and as such, it was necessary to frame the said additional issues for the purpose of adjudicating upon the controversy between the parties. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order passed by the Trial Court deserves to be set aside and I.A.No.21 deserves to be partly allowed by directing framing of additional two issues in the suit. 6. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9988 WP No. 33437 of 2025 (ii) The impugned order dated 23.08.2025 passed on I.A.No.21 in O.S.No.458/2014 by the Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Chitradurga, is hereby set aside. (iii) Consequently, I.A.No.21 is partly allowed, by directing the Trial Court to frame the following two additional issues: “1. Whether the plaintiffs prove that, they are entitled for possession of the schedule property from the Defendant? 2. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled for damages and mesne profit and future mesne profits?” (iv) All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept/left open and no opinion is expressed on merits/demerits of the rival contentions. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMC List No.: 4 Sl No.: 33