- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010290402023 NC: 2026:KHC:43937 W.P. No.12166/2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.12166/2023 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. M. SYED NIZAMUDDIN S/O H. SYED MOHIUDDIN AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT NO.21, KUPPUSWAMY NAIDU STREET NO.7/11, II STAGE, BANGALORE-560051. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.R. NAGARAJA, ADV., FOR SRI. VISWANATHA SHETTY V, ADV.,) AND: 1. SRI. C. SAMPANGI SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S. SMT. KRISHNAVENI W/O LATE SAMPANGI AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS. 2. SRI. GNANVEL S/O LATE SAMPANGI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS. 3. SRI. MARVEL S/O LATE SAMPANGI AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS. 4. SMT. SARITHA S. D/O LATE SAMPANGI AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010290402023 NC: 2026:KHC:43937 W.P. No.12166/2023 5. SRI. AMARVEL S/O LATE SAMPANGI AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS. 6. SMT. SABITA D/O LATE SAMPANGI AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS. ALL ARE R/AT HOUSE LIST NO.1434/1454/3, KADUGONDANAHALLI ARABIC COLLEGE POST BENGALURU-560045. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAMU K.H. ADV., FOR R1 TO R6) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DTD 17.04.2023 PASSED BY THE XLIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU (CCH-44) ON IA NO.8 IN OS NO.7032/2013 WHICH IS PRODUCED VIDE ANNX-E BY ALLOWING THE ABOVE WP & 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 17.04.2023 passed on I.A.No.8 in O.S.No.7032/2013 by XLIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-44) (for short, ‘the Trial Court’. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010290402023 NC: 2026:KHC:43937 W.P. No.12166/2023 2. Heard Sri.K.R.Nagaraja, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.Viswanatha Shetty V., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Ramu K.H., learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 3. The petitioner-plaintiff has filed a suit in O.S.No.7032/2013 seeking the relief of declaration that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of schedule 'B' property and having right, title and interest over the same and sought for other reliefs. In the said suit, the respondents- defendants filed a written statement. The plaintiff examined himself as PW-1 and thereafter, filed an application in I.A.No.8 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘the CPC’), seeking prayer to discard the evidence of PW-1 and permit him to lead fresh evidence in the above case. The plaintiff also filed I.A.No.9 under Order III Rule 2(a) of the CPC, seeking permission to lead evidence through the General Power of Attorney (GPA) holder Mr.Yaseen Khan. The Trial Court, - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010290402023 NC: 2026:KHC:43937 W.P. No.12166/2023 under the impugned order, rejected I.A.No.8 and allowed I.A.No.9. 4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that due to ill health, the plaintiff was unable to appear before the Court and tender for cross- examination and lead further evidence. Hence, his evidence may be discarded by permitting the GPA holder to adduce the evidence. It is to be noticed that the plaintiff has already adduced evidence as PW-1 which is on record and he should be available for cross-examination, then only his evidence can be considered for the purpose of appreciation of the contention of the petitioner. Non- availability of PW-1 for cross-examination for whatever reason, may not be a ground to seek for discarding the evidence of PW-1. 5. The Trial Court, taking note of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, has rightly come to the conclusion that the evidence of PW-1 cannot be discarded. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010290402023 NC: 2026:KHC:43937 W.P. No.12166/2023 The Trial Court has also taken note of the fact that the plaintiff is unable to adduce evidence and allowed I.A.No.9 filed under Order III Rule 2(a) of the CPC, by permitting the plaintiff to lead evidence through the GPA holder. I do not find any good ground to interfere with the order passed by the Trial Court in the present writ petition. 6. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is hereby rejected. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45