- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010515502026 NC: 2026:KHC:39999 WP No. 23434 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 23434 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI GOPALA POONJA S/O LATE MUNDAPPA POONJA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT KARINKA HOUSE, NETLA MOODNUR VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 353 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASANNA V.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. VARIJA ADAPA D/O LATE MUNDAPPA POONJA W/O MAHABALA ADAPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS R/AT ARASULIGE HOUSE, SARAPADY VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 211 2. VEDAVATHI SHETTY D/O LATE MUNDAPPA POONJA W/O VITALA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/AT PANTADKA HOUSE, NERALAKATTE POST, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010515502026 NC: 2026:KHC:39999 WP No. 23434 of 2026 NETLA MOODNUR VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 353 3. REVATHI RAI D/O LATE MUNDAPPA POONJA W/O RAVINDRA RAI AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT NADU URDILA HOUSE, NERALAKATTE POST, NETLA MOODNUR VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT - 574 353 4. VITALA POONJA S/O LATE MUNDAPPA POONJA AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS R/AT VANDALA PALACE KANAKADASA CIRCLE, OPPOSITE TO LAKE, GANDHI NAGAR, P.B.ROAD, BELAGAVI DISTRICT - 590 001 …respondents THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (I) QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 13.07.2026 ON IA.NO.8 FILED UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC, 1908 AND IA.NO.9 FILED UNDER ORDER 16 RULE 2 OF CPC, 1908 IN OS.NO.18/2021 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BANTWAL, D.K., VIDE ANNEXURE- A, AND PASS CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER ALLOWING THE SAID APPLICATIONS IA.NO.8 AND 9 VIDE ANNEXURE-H AND J RESPECTIVELY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010515502026 NC: 2026:KHC:39999 WP No. 23434 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 13.07.2026 passed in OS No.18/2021 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Bantwal, Dakshina Kannada (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court' for short). 2. Heard Sri.Prasanna V.R., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and meticulously perused the material available on record. 3. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 have filed suit for partition. In the said suit, the petitioner, who is defendant No.2, has taken contention that there was an earlier oral partition between the parties and the said partition was acted upon and that the revenue records were mutated accordingly. It is further contended that the parties are in possession of their respective shares in terms of the said oral partition. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010515502026 NC: 2026:KHC:39999 WP No. 23434 of 2026 4. In order to examine the panchas in whose presence the oral partition had taken place, the petitioner- defendant No.2 filed an application under Order XVI Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ’CPC’), seeking issuance of summons to the witnesses referred in the said application. The said application was allowed by the Trial Court and summons was issued to the witness. The matter was posted for examination of the said witness on 29.01.2026. However on the said date, witness could not present before the Court. 5. The records indicate that summons was served on the wife of the witness around 12.00 p.m. on the same day. Hence, the witness could not appear before the Court and thereafter, defendant No.2 filed another application i.e., IA No.9 seeking issuance of fresh summons to the very same witness, which came to be rejected by the Trial Court on the ground that after 29.01.2026, on a given date the said witness could not be present before the Court. However, he ought to have - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010515502026 NC: 2026:KHC:39999 WP No. 23434 of 2026 appeared on 05.02.2026 and due to failure to appear on the said date by the witness, the Trial Court rejected the application. 6. Hence, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the order of the Trial Court in the present writ petition. However, if the suit is decreed against the petitioner, it is open for the petitioner to raise the rejection of the application filed by defendant No.2 as one of the ground in the appeal against the final judgment and decree. 7. With the aforesaid liberty, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE SMC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 3