- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14906 W.P. No.18600/2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO 18600/2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: M/S. MAGME TECHNO PVT. LTD. NO.23/C, ARUNAGIRI COMPLEX BANGALORE BYPASS ROAD NEAR BUS STAND, KAMARAJ COLONY HOSUR, TAMIL NADU-635109 REP. BY ITS COMPANY SECRETARY AND ALSO AT: M/S MAGME TECHNO PVT LTD MAGME LEARNING BUILDING VIDYANAGAR, BOMMASANDRA HEBBAGODI, ELECTRONIC CITY BENGALURU-560100. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAGARAJA K.R. ADV., FOR SRI. VISHWANATHA SHETTY V, ADV.,) AND: M/S. PRAKRUTHI GROUPS NO.575/A, 2ND STAGE A BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU-560010 REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. R. SHEKAR. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ANIL KUMAR A.S. ADV., FOR SRI. PARAMESWARAPPA C, ADV.,) Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14906 W.P. No.18600/2021 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DT.7.10.2021 IN O.S 4450/2018 PASSED BY THE LXXXIV ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-85) (ANNEXURE-D) BY REJECTING THE IA.NO.1 AND 2 FILED BY THE PETITIONER SEEKING RE-OPENING OF THE ABOVE CASE FORM THE STAGE OF EVIDENCE AND TO PERMIT FOR FILING OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE I.A.NO.1 AND 2 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BY ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This petition is filed challenging the order dated 07.10.2021 passed on I.A.Nos.1 and 2 filed for re-opening of the case from the stage of evidence and to permit the petitioner-defendant to file the written statement in O.S.No.4450/2018 by the LXXXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, (for short, the trial Court). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14906 W.P. No.18600/2021 2. Sri.Nagaraja K.R., learned counsel for Sri.Vishwnatha Shetty V., learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent-plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.4450/2018 for recovery of money and in the said suit the petitioner-defendant has filed an application in IA Nos.1 and 2 seeking to re-open the said case from the stage of evidence and permit the defendant to file the written statement. However, the trial Court rejected the applications solely on the ground that the applications are filed beyond period prescribed to file the written statement. It is submitted that the petitioner-defendant has a good case on merits and if the written statement is not filed great prejudice would be caused to the defendant. Hence, he seeks to allow the petition. 3. Per contra, Sri.Anil Kumar A.S., learned counsel for Sri.Parameswarappa C., learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff supports the impugned order and submits that the suit being one for recovery of money, the petitioner-defendant, after service of summons, failed to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14906 W.P. No.18600/2021 file the written statement during the stipulated time, he awaited for the commencement of the trial and thereafter moved an application, which is an abuse of process of law and dragging of the proceedings. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the petition. 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material available on record. 5. The respondent-plaintiff has filed a suit in O.S.No.4450/2018 seeking relief of judgment and decree against the petitioner-defendant to pay a sum of Rs.5,29,670/- along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the suit till the date of realization. In the said suit, the suit summons was served and the petitioner entered appearance, but failed to file the written statement in due time. Thereafter, filing of written statement was closed and the matter was posted for evidence. Thereafter, the petitioner-defendant filed an - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14906 W.P. No.18600/2021 application in IA Nos.1 and 2 to re-open the case from the stage of evidence and to permit the petitioner-defendant to file a written statement, which came to be rejected by the trial Court by the impugned order. It is to be noticed that the time stipulated under Order VIII Rule 1 of CPC is mandatory in nature and in view of the same, I am of the considered view that the petitioner-defendant is required to be provided with an opportunity to file the written statement as the right to defend the suit is a substantive right available to the party in the suit. 6. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. The order dated 07.10.2021 passed on I.A.Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.4450/2018 by the LXXXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is hereby set aside. Consequently, I.A.Nos.1 and 2 filed - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14906 W.P. No.18600/2021 by the petitioner-defendant are allowed. The trial Court is directed to accept the written statement filed by the defendant. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26