- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010262732025 NC: 2026:KHC:45409 WP No. 12886 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.12886 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. BALASUBRAMANI S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT C/O KRISHNAPPA, NO.17, 3RD FLOOR, EXOTIC MERIDIAN, 10TH CROSS, WILSON GARDEN, BENGALURU-560027. 2. SRI. S.V. RAMACHANDRA GOWDA S/O LATE VENKATASWAMY GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT “CHANDRA NIVAS” NO.3,13TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS ROAD, SADASIVNAGARA, BENGALURU-560089. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. R. SRINIVASA GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. JAYAMMA B. @ JAYALAKSHMI RAVIKUMAR W/O RAVIKUMAR AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 2. SRI RAVIKUMAR S/O LATE CHICKKAMUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, 3. SRI R. MOHAN KUMAR S/O RAVIKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010262732025 NC: 2026:KHC:45409 WP No. 12886 of 2025 4. SRI. R. MUNESH KUMAR S/O RAVIKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT NO.201 “B” BLOCK, 2ND FLOOR, M.S. PLAZZO APARTMENTS, JAKKUR MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU – 560064. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N.S. BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 20.02.2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, DEVANAHALLI IN O.S.NO.1086/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-D. CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE TRIAL COURT TO TAKE THE COUNTER CLAIM ON RECORD AND PROCEED WITH THE TRIAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners, who are defendant Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.1086/2023 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli [the Trial Court] have filed the present writ petition calling in question the order dated 20.02.2025, whereby the Trial Court declined to take the counterclaim filed by the petitioners on the ground that the stage for filing the counterclaim was already over and that no application seeking permission had been filed. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010262732025 NC: 2026:KHC:45409 WP No. 12886 of 2025 Brief facts 2. The plaintiffs [the respondents] instituted suit O.S.No.1086/2023 seeking cancellation of the registered agreement of sale dated 02.01.2020 executed in favour of the defendants in respect of the suit schedule property, along with the consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with their possession and from cutting or removing the standing eucalyptus trees. 3. The suit was contested by the defendants, who entered appearance and filed their written statement. The plaintiffs had also sought an order of temporary injunction, which was granted and subsequently confirmed by the Trial Court. The defendants’ application for injunction came to be rejected. On 20.02.2025, learned counsel appearing for the defendants filed counterclaim. The Trial Court, however, recorded that the stage of filing counterclaim was already over and, as no application seeking permission to file the counterclaim had been filed, the Trial Court declined to take the counterclaim on record. The matter was thereafter posted for framing of issues. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010262732025 NC: 2026:KHC:45409 WP No. 12886 of 2025 Submissions 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned order is a non-speaking order and has resulted in denial of an opportunity to the petitioners to put forth their substantive claim by way of counterclaim. Reasons and conclusion 5. The Trial Court, while recording the filing of the counterclaim on 20.02.2025, simply observed that the “stage of filing counterclaim is already over”. It was further recorded that no application had been filed seeking permission to file the counterclaim and, on that basis, the Trial Court held that the counterclaim could not be taken on record. No further reasons have been assigned for arriving at such a conclusion. 6. The Trial Court was required to consider the stage of the suit, the nature of the claim sought to be raised, the relevant provisions governing the counterclaim and the rival contention of the parties before arriving at a conclusion. The order impugned is bereft of reasons. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010262732025 NC: 2026:KHC:45409 WP No. 12886 of 2025 7. The order sheet itself indicates that, immediately prior to the filing of the counterclaim, the matter had been posted for framing of issues. Therefore, the question as to whether counterclaim could be received at that stage required consideration by the Trial Court by assigning appropriate reasons. 8. In these circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim sought to be raised by the petitioners, this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed in part. ii. The order dated 20.02.2025 passed by the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli in O.S.No.1086/2023 is set aside. iii. The matter is remitted to the Trial Court for reconsideration in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity to all the concerned parties and passing a reasoned and speaking order. iv. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the counterclaim and - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010262732025 NC: 2026:KHC:45409 WP No. 12886 of 2025 the Trial Court shall consider the same independently in accordance with law. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA AT List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18