- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2360 CRP No. 173 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 173 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. M/S NARAYANASWAMY AND SONS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM NO 33, (NEW 20) VANIVILAS ROAD, ROYAPETTAH BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU 560004 REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SHRI N VENKATESH S/O B M NARAYANASWAMY 2. N VENKATESH S/O B M NARAYANASWAMY AGED 57 YEARS PRESENTLY AT NO 25 WEST COTT ROAD, ROYAPETTAH CHENNAI 600014 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ASHOK B PATIL., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI N VISHWANATH S/O B M NARAYANASWAMY AGED 63 YEARS R/AT NO 20(1ST FLOOR) Digitally signed by KRISHNAPPA LAXMI YASHODA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2360 CRP No. 173 of 2024 VANIVILAS ROAD , BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU 560004 2. SHRI G KUMARASWAMY S/O B M NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/AT NO 20, VANIVILAS ROAD BASAVANAGUDI BENGALURU 560004 3. SRI K T RAJASHEKAR S/O LATE THIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS R/AT NO 321, TSP ROAD OPPOSITE BANGALORE MEDICAL COLLEGE BENGALURU 560002 4. M/S RANGANATHA AND SONS R/AT NO 1/47 VASAVI TEMPLE ROAD SAJJANRAO CIRCLE VISHVESHVARAPURAM BENGALURU 560004 REPRSENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI R LOKANATH …RESPONDENTS (BY MS. ANJANA A.V. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAKSHITHA D J., ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SEC.115 OF CPC., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.11.2023 PASSED ON IA NO.6 IN OS NO.5523/2014 ON THE FILE OF XXXI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2360 CRP No. 173 of 2024 AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU DISMISSING THE IA NO.6 FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(a) AND (d) OF CPC., FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo dated 04.12.2025 stating that after the impugned order dated 22.11.2023 was passed by the trial court rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Order VII Rule 11, the 1st respondent, who is not a partner of the firm seems to have executed an agreement of sale dated 21.10.2022 in respect of a portion of the suit schedule property in favour of a third party. In that regard, the petitioners have filed an application to implead the agreement holder in the suit and the petitioners have also filed an application to amend their written statement seeking a prayer for cancellation of the said agreement of sale by way of a counter claim. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2360 CRP No. 173 of 2024 2. In that view of the matter, and in view of the subsequent developments, learned counsel submits that the Civil Revision Petition may be disposed of, while also permitting the petitioners’ herein who are defendants No.1 and 2 to withdraw I.A.No.6, which was filed under Order VII Rule 11. It is also stated that the plaintiff had sought for amendment of the plaint and since the said application was allowed, the petitioners have filed W.P.No.2961 of 2025 (GM-CPC), which is pending consideration before this court. It is therefore stated in the application that depending on the outcome of the said writ petition, if necessary, the petitioners will take the next step. 5. Having regard to the statements made in the memo and in view of the prayer made in the memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw I.A.No.6 on which an order is already passed by the trial court, this Court is of the considered opinion that no prejudice will be caused to the respondent plaintiffs if this Civil Revision Petition is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2360 CRP No. 173 of 2024 permitted to be withdrawn consequently permitting the defendants No.1 and 2 to withdraw I.A.No.6. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of while also directing that I.A. No.6 filed by defendants No.1 and 2 in O.S. No.5523/2014 on the file of the XXXI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, at Bangalore, is dismissed as withdrawn. Liberty is reserved to the defendants No.1 and 2 to file a fresh application on the same cause of action if necessary. 7. Needless to observe that all contentions will be left open even for the respondents, to be raised if such an application is filed. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE KLY CT: JL