Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 37324 (KAR)

MRS.SARASWATHI BAI v. MRS GOPI RAO M

WP/23826/2026 · 2026-08-20

Lalitha Kanneganti

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010521882026 NC: 2026:KHC:45237 WP No. 23826 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 23826 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. MRS.SARASWATHI BAI, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, W/O.LATE.M.DEVA RAO, 2. MR.D.NAVEEN PAWAR, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O.LATE.M.DEVA RAO, 3. MR.D.MARUTHI PAWAR, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O.LATE.M.DEVA RAO, PETITIONERS 1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT NO.204, 2ND BLOCK, SOMANAHALLI POST, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 116. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRASHANT N RAJ, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.RAJAGOPALA NAIDU., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MRS. GOPI RAO M, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, S/O.LATE.MUNISWAMY RAO, RESIDING AT NO.1348/3, 2ND MAIN, Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010521882026 NC: 2026:KHC:45237 WP No. 23826 of 2026 2ND CROSS, K.N.EXTENSION, YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU – 22. 2. MRS.SUSHEELA BAI, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, W/O.LATE.R.VASUDEVA RAO, RESIDING AT RAYARADODDI, SOMANAHALLI POST, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 116. 3. MRS.MYNA BAI, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, W/O.LATE.GAJENDRA RAO, RESIDING AT NO.201, VAIBHAV ENCLAVE APARTMENT, 2ND FLOOR, 6TH CROSS ROAD, BRUNDAVANNAGAR, SBM COLONY, MATHIKERE, BENGALURU – 54. SMT.MANJULA BAI, IS NO MORE BUT HER L.R.'S HAVE NOT BEEN MADE AS PARTIES, 4. MRS.GAYATHRI BAI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, W/O LATE BHIM RAO, RESIDING AT BYLAHALLI, KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010521882026 NC: 2026:KHC:45237 WP No. 23826 of 2026 5. MRS.NIRMALA BAI, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, W/O.LATE.BHIM RAO, RESIDING AT NO.20, 2ND CROSS, 1ST MAIN, NEAR GANESHA TEMPLE, VINAYAKANAGAR, NAGASANDRA, BENGALURU – 73. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B.VACHAN, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (I) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 18/07/2026 PASSED BY I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU IN REFUSING TO MARK THE DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE PETITIONERS IN O.S.NO. 1382/2007 AS PER ANNEXURE – A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010521882026 NC: 2026:KHC:45237 WP No. 23826 of 2026 ORAL ORDER The petitioners/defendants are before this Court aggrieved by the order dated 18.07.2026 passed in OS.No.1382/2007 on the file of the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru. Whereby, the Trial Court rejected the application filed by the petitioners and refused to mark the documents in evidence. 2. In the impugned order, the Trial Court observed that the documents ought to be admitted in evidence by defendant No.1 are titled as Panchayath Vibhagapatra dated 15.09.1999, untitled document dated 30.07.2002 and titled as Panchayath Vibhaga Patra dated 10.03.1977 are sought to be marked. Then the Court proceeds to read the contents of the same. Then finally, the Court observes that the documents sought to be admitted in evidence are contrary to the pleadings of defendant No.1 and inadmissible in evidence and those documents cannot be marked. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the Court has failed to give any reasons for - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010521882026 NC: 2026:KHC:45237 WP No. 23826 of 2026 refusing the request of the defendants to mark these documents. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the Court has passed a reasoned order. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the material on record. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the order is bereft of reasons. Considering the fact that this is the suit of the year 2007 and also conscious of the fact that the Court has failed to give any reasons. This Court has passed in the following order. ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. The order impugned dated 18.07.2026 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Court for fresh consideration. iii. Since, the suit of the year 2007, the Court shall make all its efforts to dispose of the matter, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than one year. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010521882026 NC: 2026:KHC:45237 WP No. 23826 of 2026 iv. The petitioners shall co-operate with the trial. If, he fails to co-operate, then the Court shall proceed with the matter in accordance with law. v. Pending IAs, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23