- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30602 WP No. 54749 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 54749 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI SUBBANAYAKA S/O LATE JAVARANYAKA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST R/AT CHIKKABHERYA VILLAGE MUNJANAHALLI POST HOSA AGRAHARA HOBLI K.R.NAGAR TALUK - 571 602 MYSORE DISTRICT - 57001 2. SRI RAJANAYAKA S/O LATE JAVARANAYAKA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST R/AT KALETHIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, MUTTUR POST, KASABA HOBLI PERIYAPATNA TALUK - 571 107 MYSORE DISTRICT-57001. .. PETITIONERS (BY SMT.ANUSHA ASUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. A. MADHUSUDHANA RAO, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30602 WP No. 54749 of 2018 AND: 1. SMT DAMAYANTHI W/O LATE CHOWDAIAH AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST. 2. SRI JAYAKUMARA S/O LATE CHOWDAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, 3. SRI SHASHIDARA S/O LATE CHOWDAIAH AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, ENGINEER 4. SMT. K C VEENA D/O LATE CHOWDAIAH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, 5. SMT. PAVANA @ JYOTHI D/O LATE CHOWDAIAH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5 ARE ALL R/AT KALETHIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE MUTTUR POST, KASABA HOBLI PERIYAPATNA TALUK - 571 107 MYSORE DISTRICT - 57001 SMT. JAYAMMA SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30602 WP No. 54749 of 2018 6. SMT. SHAKUNTHALA KUMARI D/O LATE SAMPATH KUMAR W/O SRI SOMASHEKARA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, ENGINEER, 7. SRI ANANTHAKUMAR S/O LATE SAMPATH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, 8. SRI UPENDRAKUMAR S/O LATE SAMPATH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, RESPONDENTS 6 TO 8 ARE ALL R/AT DODDAMAREGOWDANAHALLI VILLAGE & POST, ILAVALA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK - 57001 9. SMT. PUTTAMMA D/O LATE JAVARANAYAKA W/O SRI THAMMANAYAKA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT HARAGODANAHALLI VILLAGE YELECHAGAHALLI POST HALLI MYSORE HOBLI HOLENARASIPURA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201. 10. SMT. THAYAMMA D/O LATE JAVARANAYAKA W/O SRI SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30602 WP No. 54749 of 2018 AGRICULTURIST, R/AT GALAGEKERE VILLAGE AND POST HOSA AGRAHARA HOBLI K.R.NAGAR TALUK - 571 602 MYSORE DISTRICT - 57001. 11. SMT. KALAMMA W/O LATE JAVARANAYAKA AGED ABOUT 90 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/AT CHIKKABHERYA VILLAGE MUNJANAHALLI POST HOSA AGRAHARA HOBLI, K.R. NAGAR TALUK - 571 602, MYSORE DISTRICT - 57001. RESPONDENT NO.11 IS DECEASED RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 10 ARE THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DECEASED RESPONDENT NO.11 AS PER THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 09.06.2025 12. SRI MANJUNATHA S/O LATE THIMMAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/AT CONVENT ROAD RUDRAPPA BADAVANE PERIYAPATNA TOWN - 5771107 MYSORE DISTRICT - 57001. 13. SMT. AARIEF JAHN W/O LATE MAHAMAD JAFER AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30602 WP No. 54749 of 2018 HOUSE HOLD WORK, R/AT SANNAIAH STREET, PETE, PERIYAPATNA TOWN - 5771107 MYSORE-57001 SINCE DEAD BY LRS 13A. SRI. MOHAMMED ZOKHRIYA S/O. LATE MOHAMMED JAFER MAJOR 13B. SMT. TABASSUM BHANU D/O. LATE MOHAMMED JAFFAR MAJOR 13C. SRI. MOHAMMED MUZAMIL S/O. LATE MOHAMMED JAFAR RESPONDENTS NO.13A TO 13 C ARE RESIDING AT NO.964 SANNA BEEDI, PERIYAPATNA TOWN PERIYAPATNA TALUK MYSURU - 571 107 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.H.V.SUBRAMANYA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 - R8 & R12 R9 AND R13 (A TO C) ARE SERVED & UN-REPRESENTED VIDE ORDER DATED 08.01.2025, NOTICE TO R10 IS DEEMED SERVICE OF NOTICE VIDE ORDER DATED 09.06.2025, R1 TO R10 ARE LRS OF DECEASED R11) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30602 WP No. 54749 of 2018 ORDER DATED 31.10.2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, PERIYAPATNA, ON I.A.NO.16 IN O.S.NO.8/2013 PRODUCED AT ANNEURE-H, ALLOW THIS WRIT PETITION WITH COSTS, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 31.10.2018 passed on I.A.No.16 in O.S.No.8/2013 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Periyapatna (hereinafter referred to as the 'Trial Court' for short). 2. Smt. Anusha Asundi, learned counsel on behalf of Sri. A Madhusudhana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have filed a suit for partition and separate possession. In the said suit, the petitioner No.1 adduced the evidence as PW1. Thereafter, they filed an application for summoning of witnesses and production of documents. The said application came to be - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30602 WP No. 54749 of 2018 rejected by the Trial Court under the impugned order solely on the ground that it would cause further delay in adjudicating the dispute. It is submitted that PW1, in his evidence clearly deposed that defendant Nos.1 to 5 have bank accounts and fixed deposits, and that the amounts therein are from the joint family funds of late Chowdaiah. When such an assertion is made in the plaint as well as in the evidence, the Trial Court ought to have allowed the application as the suit is a partition suit. It is further submitted that the plaintiffs tried to secure the particulars from the bank, however, the bank accounts and other particulars with regard to the fixed deposits were not made available to the petitioners, as the petitioners are third parties. Hence, she seeks to allow the application seeking to summon the bank manager as well as the documents. 3. Per contra, Sri. H.V. Subramanya, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 8 and 12 submits that the bank accounts and fixed deposits are the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30602 WP No. 54749 of 2018 self-acquired properties of defendant Nos.1 to 5, and therefore they cannot be asked to summon the witnesses or produce documents from the bank. It is submitted that defendant Nos.4 and 5 are married and residing in different places along with their families and their account particulars cannot be sought. Hence he seeks to dismiss the petition. 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the respondents and have meticulously perused the material available on record. 5. The petitioners filed O.S.No.8/2013 against Smt. Damayanthi and others seeking for the relief of partition and separate possession. In the said suit, the defendants have filed a detailed written statement denying the assertion that the suit schedule properties are joint family properties and that the plaintiffs have no right over the same. Plaintiff No.1 examined himself as PW1. In his - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30602 WP No. 54749 of 2018 examination-in-chief, plaintiff No.1 deposed that there is deposit of Rs.60,00,000/- in SBI, ADB, Abburu Branch, a deposit Rs.30,00,000/- in Syndicate Bank, and a deposit of Rs.50,00,000/- in MDCC Bank, and that these deposits belong to late Sri. Chowdaiah and that these are the suit schedule properties in respect of which the plaintiffs are seeking partition. 6. The plaintiffs filed an application under Order XVI Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking to summon three witnesses, namely, the Manager, SBI Abburu Branch, Periyapatna, the Manager, Syndicate Bank, Bylakuppe Branch and the Manager, MDCC Bank, Periyapatna Branch. They also sought documents pertaining to the fixed deposits and SB accounts of late Sri. Chowdaiah and defendant Nos.1 to 5 from the banks. The said application came to be rejected by the Trial Court solely on the ground that it would cause further delay in the trial. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30602 WP No. 54749 of 2018 7. It is to be noticed that, in the plaint, a specific assertion has been made that the suit schedule properties that is movable as well as immoveable properties are joint family properties and that certain amounts are lying in SB accounts as well as fixed deposits. It is further asserted that those amounts are pertaining to late Sri Chowdaiah, who was the kartha of the family and that defendant Nos.1 to 5 are enjoying the said amounts. Furthermore, the affidavit accompanying the application, plaint as well as the evidence of PW1 clearly depose that in the three bank accounts, the funds from the joint family property are deposited. 8. Though the respondents have contended that the amounts and bank accounts have nothing to do with the joint family and that the amounts are the self-acquired amounts of the defendants, in my considered view, if the concerned bank managers are summoned and directed to produce the sought documents before the Trial Court, the ends of justice would be met. The evidence of the bank - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30602 WP No. 54749 of 2018 officials as well as the documents would make it clear as to the dates of opening of the accounts, transactions made, nominees etc.,. Since the plaintiffs have made specific assertions in the plaint and made these items i.e. Item Nos.32 to 34, as part of the suit schedule properties, I am of the view that the application deserves to be allowed. 9. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following; ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed. ii) The impugned order dated 31.10.2018 passed in O.S.No.8/2013 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Periyapatna is set aside. Consequently, I.A.No.16 filed by the plaintiffs under Order XVI Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC is allowed. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30602 WP No. 54749 of 2018 iii) The Trial Court shall issue summons to the witnesses and to secure the documents. iv) The Trial Court shall endeavour to dispose of the suit as early as possible. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE SHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15