- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010307952023 NC: 2026:KHC:41833 WP No. 12749 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT PETITION NO. 12749 OF 2023 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. VENKATESH PATHI M S/O SRI. MARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NEW NO. 353/1, OLD NO.137, NEXT TO SHREE SAI APARTMENT LAKEVIEW RESIDENCY, RAJANNA LAYOUT, HORAMAVUAGARA, HORAMAAVU POST, BANGALORE - 560043. 2. SRI. LAKSHMIPATHY, S/O LATE A. GOPAL, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT 814/ 464, 5TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK, I STAGE, HBR LAYOUT KALYAN NAGAR POST, NEXT TO MUNESHWARA TEMPLE, BANGALORE - 560043. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. GANESH PRASAD B S, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. H M VENKATASWAMY S/O LATE MUNIRAMAIAH, AGED 55 YEARS, Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010307952023 NC: 2026:KHC:41833 WP No. 12749 of 2023 R/AT VENKATESWARA NILAYA, HORAMAVU POST, HORAMAVU, BANGALORE - 560043 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S R SREEPRASAD, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 15/06/2023 PASSED IN IA NOS 6 AND 7 IN OS NO 8858/2014 ON THE FILE OF XI ADDL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE (CCH-8) PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 15.06.20231 passed on IA.Nos.6 and 7 in OS No.8858/2014 by the XI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore (CCH-8)2. 2. The petitioners who were defendant Nos.1 and 2 in the suit, filed IA.No.6 to reopen the case to permit them to adduce evidence. IA.No.7 was filed to recall the order dated 11.04.2023. Vide the impugned order, the trial Court 1 hereinafter referred to as 'the impugned order' 2 hereinafter referred to as 'the trial Court' - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010307952023 NC: 2026:KHC:41833 WP No. 12749 of 2023 dismissed the said applications by noticing that defendant No.1 had not complied with the order dated 28.09.2022 passed by this Court in W.P.No.53003/2016. 3. The trial Court vide the impugned order had noticed the operative portion of the order dated 28.09.2022 and rejected the applications. 4. It is forthcoming that this Court vide the order dated 28.09.2022 allowed the applications filed by defendant No.1 for recall of PW.1 subject to the condition that the defendants pay the arrears of rent to the plaintiff at the rate of `35,000/- p.m., from the date of the suit within one month from the date of the said order. 5. Admittedly, the defendants have not paid the said amount till date. In view of the same, the impugned order passed by the trial Court cannot be faulted. 6. The present writ petition is dismissed. SD/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE ND List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3