- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32433 W.P. No.20049/2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.20049/2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. PAPANNA S/O SRI. T. APPAIAH AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/AT NO.8, 7TH CROSS 18TH MAIN ROAD NARAYANAGOWDA LAYOUT B T M LAYOUT, 1ST STAGE BANGALORE-560029. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R.A. DEV ANAND, ADV.,) AND: 1. SMT. GNANA MANI W/O LATE ANTHONY CROUSE AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS. 2. SMT. AROGYA MARY W/O SRI. RAKESH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS. BOTH ARE R/AT NO.11 IN SY NO.77/3 16TH MAIN, 18TH CROSS II STAGE B T M LAYOUT BANGALORE-560076. 3. SRI. BHARATH RUDRAIAH SANJI S/O SANJI PAI Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32433 W.P. No.20049/2021 MAJOR R/AT NO.36/A, CHAMUNDIPURA KANAKPURA MAIN ROAD J P NAGAR 2ND PHASE BANGALORE-560078. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SAMARTH MURTHY, ADV., FOR SRI. P. VENKATARAMANA & SRI. N. DINAKAR, ADV., FOR R3 V/O/DTD:12.11.2021, NOTICE TO R1 & R2 STANDS WAIVED) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH ORDER OF THE COURT OF THE XXXIX CITY CIVIL JUDGE AT BANGALORE CITY (CCH-40) AND PASSED ON IA NOS.1/2021 AND 2/2021 DATED 22.10.2021 IN O.S.NO.6701/2005 AND WHICH ORDER AS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-G 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 writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 22.10.2021 passed on I.A.Nos.1/2021 and 2/2021 in O.S.No.6701/2005 by the XXXIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru City (CCH-40) (for short, ‘the Trial Court’). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32433 W.P. No.20049/2021 2. The petitioner has filed a suit for declaration and injunction. In the said suit, the respondents filed a detailed written statement denying the plaint averments. The Trial Court appointed the Court Commissioner. The Court Commissioner has submitted a report and the Court Commissioner was examined as CW-1. However, on the given date, the plaintiff could not cross-examine CW-1. Hence, the matter was posted for the next stage. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed I.A.Nos.1/2021 and 2/2021 seeking to re-open the stage of cross-examination of CW-1 and sought permission to cross-examine CW-1. 3. Perused the averments made in the affidavit accompanying the applications and taking note of the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 that he has no objection to allow the writ petition, I am of the considered view that one opportunity needs to be provided to the plaintiff to cross-examine CW-1. However, allowing such applications would be on terms. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32433 W.P. No.20049/2021 4. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 22.10.2021 passed on I.A.Nos.1/2021 and 2/2021, is set aside. Consequently, I.A.Nos.1/2021 and 2/2021 are allowed. (iii) The plaintiff shall cross-examine CW-1 on the next date of hearing i.e. 31.07.2026 or any date fixed by the Trial Court. CW-1 shall remain present on the said date. (iv) The Trial Court shall endure to dispose of the suit as early as possible without any delay. No order as to costs. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37