- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:420 WP No. 15437 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT PETITION NO. 15437 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. DR. V.SURENDRA SHETTY AGE:69 YEARS, S/O LATE BOMMAYYA SHETTY, R/O “SIDDARTHA”, OPP. KMC HOSTEL, FALNIR, KAPRIGUDDA, MANGALURU-575 001. D.K. 2. SABITA DASA RAI AGE: 73 YEARS, W/O LATE DASA RAI, R/O 656, “JAYANI”, 4TH MAIN, 8TH CROSS, BEML LAYOUT, OPP. BEST CLUB, RAJA RAJESHWARI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 098. 3. HEMALATHA SURESH SHENAVA AGE:69 YEARS, W/O SURESH SHENAVA, R/O “VAIBHAV”, OPP. KMC HOSTEL, FALNIR, KAPRIGUDDA, MANGALURU-575 001. D.K. 4. MAMATHA SATHYANATHA HEGDE AGE: 65 YEARS, W/O CAPT. SATHYANANTHA HEGDE, R/AT “ESWHAR KRIPA”, - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:420 WP No. 15437 of 2019 NO.59A, ANANTHA NAGAR, II STAGE, MANIPAL-576 104. UDUPI DISTRICT. PETITIONER NO.2 TO 4 ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER PETITIONER NO.1 DR.V.SURENDRA SHETTY. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. S.K.ACHARYA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. V.DINESH HEGDE AGED 62 YEARS, S/O LATE BOMMAYYA SHETTY, R/O “GANESHA KRIPA”, VIDYARATHNA NAGAR, MANIPAL-576 104. UDUPI DISTRICT. 2. SHALINI SUDHAKARA SHETTY AGE:63 YEARS, W/O SUDHAKARA SHETTY, R/O NO.501, DIAMOND PARK, NAVGARH ROAD, MULUND(E), MUMBAI-400 081. 3. KRISHNALATHA DAYANANDA SHETTY AGE:67 YEARS, W/O LATE DAYANANDA SHETTY, R/O FLAT NO.17, V FLOOR, G-2, PHASE I & II, HERMES HERITAGE, CHS LTD., SHASTRI NAGAR, PUNE-411 005. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SAMPAT ANAND SHETTY., ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2-SERVED; V/O/DTD: 10.03.2025 NOTICE TO R3 IS DISPENSED WITH) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:420 WP No. 15437 of 2019 THIS W.P. FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD: 29.03.2019 PASSED IN O.S.NO.99/2013 ON THE FILE OF PRL. SR.CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, UDUPI VIDE ANENXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL ORDER 1. The present petition has been filed seeking to challenge an order dated 29.03.2019 passed in I.A.No.8 filed by respondent No.1/defendant No.1. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs submit that the I.A.No.8 as set out in paragraph No.2 of the affidavit annexed there to it is stated that the applicant is required to mark the aforesaid document in order to prove his defence. This aspect is not denied by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1/defendant No.1. He submits that the specific document, which was not previously marked, is required to be marked and that the applicant would only mark of the same. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:420 WP No. 15437 of 2019 3. Learned counsel for the parties further submits that in the interest of expediency, the matter may be disposed of with the issue of these directions. 4. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Trial Court that, on the next date of hearing, the witness-DW1 shall appear for the sole purpose of marking of the document which is already on record. 5. Given the pendency of the matter before this Court for seven years, the learned counsels for the parties jointly submit that they will not take any unnecessary adjournments before the learned Trial Court. 6. The parties are bound down by the statement made by the learned counsel today. (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE TIN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26 Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA