- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20568 W.P. No.22887/2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.22887/2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: M. CHANDRASHEKHAR S/O MAHADEVA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT LINGAMBUDHIPALYA SY.NO.89/6, SRIRAMPURA POST KASABA HOBLI MYSORE TALUK 570008. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NANDISH PATIL, ADV.,) AND: 1. V. RAVI S/O R. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT. LINGAMBUDHI PALYA SRIRAMPUA POST, KASABA HOBLI MYSORE TALUK 570008. 2. KANTHARAJU @ PATELA .V S/O R. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/A LINGAMBUDHI PALYA SRIRAMPURA POST, KASABA HOBLI MYSORE TALUK 570008. 3. V. MAHESHA S/O R. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20568 W.P. No.22887/2021 R/A LINGAMBUDHI PALYA SRIRAMPURA POST, KASABA HOBLI MYSORE TALUK 570008. 4. R. VENKATESH S/O LATE RAMBOVI AGED 58 YEARS R/A LINGAMBUDHI PALYA SRIRAMPURA POST, KASABA HOBLI MYSORE TALUK 570008. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. P. NATARAJU, ADV., FOR R1 TO R3 R4 - SERVICE OF NOTICE WAIVED V/C/O DTD:14.12.2021) - - - THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 02.11.2021 PASSED IN I.A.NO.4 AND 5 ON O.S.NO.1783/2013 PENDING ON THE FILE OF 12TH ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MYSURU VIDE ANNEXURE-F & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, 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 02.11.2021 passed on I.A.Nos.4 and 5 in O.S.No.1783/2013 by the XII Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Mysuru (for short 'the Trial Court'). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20568 W.P. No.22887/2021 2. Heard Sri.Nandish Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.P.Nataraju, learned counsel for the respondent No.1. 3. The respondents have filed O.S.No.581/2013 for the relief of declaration and mandatory injunction. In the said suit, the petitioner-defendant No.1 filed a detailed written statement. The Trial Court framed the issues. The plaintiffs adduced the evidence and the matter was posted for the defendants' evidence on 25.10.2021. On the said date, the learned counsel for the plaintiffs was present but there was no representation for the defendants. Hence, the evidence of the defendants was taken as Nil and the matter was posted for arguments. Thereafter, the defendant No.1 have filed I.A.No.4 under Order XVIII Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'CPC'), to re-call DW-1 - defendant No.1 for the purpose of defence evidence and I.A.No.5 under Section 151 of the CPC to re-open the case. The said applications were rejected by the Trial Court. It is to be - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20568 W.P. No.22887/2021 noticed that the defendants were not present on 19.10.2021 as well as on 25.10.2021. Considering the same, the Trial Court closed the evidence of the defendants and posted the matter for arguments 4. In my considered view, the right to adduce the evidence is a substantive right available to the defendants as the defendants have filed a detailed written statement denying the assertions made in the plaint and denying such a right would cause prejudice to the defendants. 5. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 02.11.2021 passed on I.A.Nos.4 and 5 in O.S.No.1783/2013 by the Trial Court, is set aside. Consequently, IA.Nos.4 and 5 are allowed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20568 W.P. No.22887/2021 (iii) The defence shall adduce the evidence on the next date of hearing before the Trial Court, without any further adjournment. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22