- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29676 WP No. 38674 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 38674 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. BIBI SABIRA WIFE OF SRI. A. R. DAMUDI, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 401, MILLICENT APARTMENT, LEONARD LANE, NEAR JOHNSON MARKET, BENGALURU-560 025. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. B.V.VIDYULATHA., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RISHI SANJAY CHUGH., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. H. C. BASAVARAJU SON OF LATE C. CHIKKANANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.95, 'SHREYAS' GAYATHRI LAYOUT ST. CHARLES HIGH SCHOOL ROAD BASAVESHWARANAGAR BENGALURU-560 079 2. SRI M.R. UDAYAPRAKASH SON OF M.B.RAMACHANDRAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 93, RAMACHANDRAPPA COMPOUND Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29676 WP No. 38674 of 2025 BHAVANA, 3RD CROSS NEAR ANJANEYA TEMPLE MALLASANDRA, DASANAHALLI 560 057. 3. SMT. C.R. KAVITHA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, WIFE OF ASHOK M.S., AT NO. B-617, SVS PETALS, CASTILLO APARTMENTS, TALACAUVERY LAYOUT, AMRUTHAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 092 4. M/S. NTI HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO. 84, 1ST FLOOR, 8TH CROSS, SUN SMILE, SERPANTINE ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU-560 020 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. D.R.RAVISHANKAR., SR. COUNSEL FOR SMT. SIRI. R., ADVOCATE FOR R3 R1, R2 & R4 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, OR ANY OTHER SIMILAR WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING AND SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 28.11.2025 PASSED IN O.S.NO.1564/2022 PENDING ON FILE OF LEARNED LV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU, AT ANNEXURE-A IN THE ABOVE PETITION AND THEREBY ALLOW THE SAID IA SEEKING TO SUMMON EXTERNAL WITNESSES DETAILED THEREIN AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29676 WP No. 38674 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers: “Wherefore, in view of the aforesaid grounds, the Petitioner most respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to: (i) Issue a writ of certiorari, or any other similar writ or order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dated 28/11/2025 passed in O.S.No.1564/2022 pending on the file of the LV Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge at Bengaluru, produced at Annexure-A in the above Petition and thereby allow the said I.A. seeking to summon external witnesses detailed therein. (ii) Grant such other relief(s) as may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 28.11.2025 passed on I.A.No.XXI/2025 in O.S.No.1564/2022, by learned LV Additional City Civil And Sessions Judge at Bengaluru, at Annexure-A, the plaintiff is before this Court. 3. The Trial Court by order impugned has rejected the I.A.No.XXI/2025 filed under Order XVI Rule 1(2) read with - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29676 WP No. 38674 of 2025 Section 151 of CPC to issue witness summons to the witnesses, i.e., Branch Manager, Union Bank of India and also the Town Planning Member, Bangalore Development Authority. The Trial Court, while dismissing the application observed that the Counsel for the plaintiff has filed I.A.No.XXI/2025 to issue witness summons without cross-examining the DW.3. No grounds made out for allowing the I.A.No.XXI/2025. Hence, I.A.No.XXI/2025 filed by the Counsel for the plaintiff was rejected. Counsel for the plaintiff prays time for cross- examination of DW.3. Call on for cross-examination of DW.3, finally as last chance by 29.11.2025. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Trial Court had failed to consider the application filed by the plaintiff seeking to issue summons to the said witnesses as the examination of those witnesses are very much crucial for the case of the plaintiff. The order that is passed by the Trial Court is bereft of reasons and the same requires to be set aside and an opportunity shall be given to the plaintiff to summon those witnesses to cross-examine them to elicit the true facts which are very much essential for the plaintiff to prove her case. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29676 WP No. 38674 of 2025 5. Learned Senior Counsel Sri.D.R.Ravishankar, appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the suit is of the year 2022 and an order was passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in M.F.A.Nos.5751/2023 c/w 5728/2023, directing the Trial Court to dispose of the suit within a period of 8 months from thereon. The petitioner herein has filed multiple number of I.As., and keep on dragging on the matter. In fact, earlier the petitioner filed an application to implead the Bank Manager in the suit. It is submitted that the said application came to be dismissed and now the plaintiff has come up with the present application. Learned Senior Counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to the order sheet and submits as to how the matter is dragged. It is further submitted that considering all these aspects of the matter, the Trial Court has rightly dismissed the application. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the Trial Court. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, perused the material on record. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29676 WP No. 38674 of 2025 7. What is the conduct of the party and how the matter has been dragged before the Trial Court, nothing has been discussed in the impugned order. When an I.A. is filed seeking to summon witnesses, by way of a cryptic order saying that the Trial Court did not find any grounds to allow the I.A., such an order passed by the Trial Court cannot be sustained. When an order passed by the Court is an order appealable/revisable to the Superior Court, the Trial Court has to record the reasons for the same, so that the Court will understand what is the reason or on what grounds the Court has refused to grant a relief to the party and any submissions made by any of the parties, cannot supplant the view of the Court. 8. It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents that the plaintiff is repeatedly filing the applications and dragging on the matter and the same should have been discussed by the Trial Court in a cryptic manner. However, the Trial Court has dismissed the application in this manner. This Court has asked the learned Counsel for the petitioner as to whether any application is filed to re-open the evidence of plaintiff. It is submitted that learned Counsel has no information. However, the order sheet - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29676 WP No. 38674 of 2025 does not disclose that any such application is filed. When an order is passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court for expeditious disposal of the suit, it is the duty of all the parties that they have to cooperate with the trial. The suit is of the year 2022 and it is the submission of the learned Senior Counsel that when the direction was issued to dispose of the suit within 8 months, but even till now, the matter is still pending. 9. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the above discussion, this Court is setting aside the impugned order as the same is bereft of reasons. However, it is made clear that the parties shall cooperate with the trial and whenever the Trial Court proceeds to pass any order, the Trial Court shall pass an order giving specific reasons for such refusal or for allowing the same. In that view of the matter, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. The impugned order dated 28.11.2025 passed on I.A.No.XXI/2025 in O.S.No.1564/2022, passed by LV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is set - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29676 WP No. 38674 of 2025 aside and the matter is remanded back to the Trial Court. ii. The Trial Court shall pass appropriate orders within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. iii. It is further made clear that the Trial Court shall make endeavors to dispose of the suit in terms of the directions issued by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in M.F.A.Nos.5751/2023 c/w 5728/2023. iv. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. v. All I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE DL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10