- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5174 WP No. 30472 of 2025 C/W WP No. 36195 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA WRIT PETITION NO.30472 OF 2025 (GM-FC) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.36195 OF 2025 (GM-FC) IN WP NO.30472/2025 BETWEEN: SRI KANCHARLADURGA PRASAD S/O. LATE K. PULLAIAHCHOUDARY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/at PLOT NO.13, ROAD NO.6 MAHENDRA HILLS SECUNDERABAD-500 026. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. BHUVANASHREE, ADVOCATE FOR; SRI HARIPRASAD K. M., ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. HEMASILPAGADDIPATI W/O. KANCHARLADURGA PRASAD AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT NO.H-1206, PURVAVENEZIA NEAR MOTHER DIARY YELAHANKA NEW TOWN Digitally signed by SOWMYA DODDAMARAIAH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5174 WP No. 30472 of 2025 C/W WP No. 36195 of 2025 BENGALURU-560 064. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI ANAND K., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AN D227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN G AND WC NO.25/2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE IV ADDL. FAMILY JUDGE, BENGALURU AND TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER ON IA NO.18 AND 19 DATED 19.09.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED IV ADDL. FAMILY JUDGE, BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-A. IN WP NO.36195/2025 BETWEEN: SRI KANCHARLADURGA PRASAD S/O. LATE K. PULLAIAHCHOUDARY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/at PLOT NO.13, ROAD NO.6, MAHENDRA HILLS SECUNDERABAD-500 026. ...PETITIONER (BY SMT. BHUVANASHREE, ADVOCATE FOR; SRI HARIPRASAD K. M., ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. G. HEMASILPA W/O. KANCHARLADURGA PRASAD AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/O. NO.H-1206, PURVAVENEZIA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5174 WP No. 30472 of 2025 C/W WP No. 36195 of 2025 NEAR MOTHER DIARY, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN BENGALURU-560 064. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI ANAND K., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN G AND WC NO.185/2015 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE IV ADDL. FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU AND TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19-9-2025 PASSED ON IA NO.19/2025 BY THE LEARNED IV ADDL. PRL. FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU IN G AND WC NO.185/2015, VIDE ANNEXURE-A, PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5174 WP No. 30472 of 2025 C/W WP No. 36195 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Heard Ms.Bhuvaneshree who represents Sri.Hariprasad.K.M learned counsel on record the petitioner in both the writ petitions. Also heard Sri.Anand.K learned counsel for the respondent in both the writ petitions. 2. Challenge in these writ petitions is the common order rendered by the Court of IV Additional Principal Judge, Bengaluru on I.A.Nos.XVIII and XIX in G & WC.No.185/2015 dated 19.09.2025. By the material that is available on record and upon hearing both the learned counsel, it is clear that respondent herein filed a case against petitioner herein seeking the Court to appoint and to declare her as the guardian of the person and property of the minor Master K.Vikranth and also to restrain petitioner herein from removing the said child from her custody. The relationship between the parties is not in dispute. Thus, petitioner herein is the husband of respondent. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5174 WP No. 30472 of 2025 C/W WP No. 36195 of 2025 3. Making her submission on the merits of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that respondent examined herself as PW1. The case was posted for cross-examination of PW1 by petitioner herein. But due to ill health of petitioner and further as his counsel was busy, cross-examination of PW1 could not be conducted. Learned counsel states that the Court treated the cross- examination of PW1 as nil finally. But petitioner is required to cross-examine PW1 to substantiate his version and therefore, he filed I.A.No.XVIII under Section 151 CPC to reopen the case and I.A.No.XIX under Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC to recall the order dated 03.07.2025 and to permit petitioner to cross-examine PW1. However, through the impugned order both the applications stood dismissed and aggrieved by the same, these writ petitions are filed. Learned counsel seeks the Court to give a fair opportunity to petitioner to cross-examine PW1. 4. Opposing the submission thus made, learned counsel for the respondent states that despite granting - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5174 WP No. 30472 of 2025 C/W WP No. 36195 of 2025 sufficient opportunities, petitioner did not choose to cross- examine PW1. Learned counsel also states that the case under the Guardians and Wards Act was filed in the year 2015 and even after lapse of 10 years, the case is still pending. Learned counsel further submits that only with an intention to drag on the matter, petitioner is adopting different tactics and thus, both the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed. 5. In the impugned order, the Court clearly mentioned that on 08.11.2024, 06.01.2025 and 04.02.2025 the case was posted for cross-examination of PW1, but petitioner herein did not choose to cross- examine PW1. Also there is a clear mention that petitioner filed I.A.Nos.XV and XVI to reopen the case and to recall the order dated 08.11.2024 for the purpose of cross- examination of PW1 and those applications were allowed and the case was posted for cross-examination of PW1. But on 03.07.2025 when the case was called out, petitioner's counsel sought time and hence, the matter - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5174 WP No. 30472 of 2025 C/W WP No. 36195 of 2025 was kept by and again the matter was called at 12.35 p.m. and again at 01.53 p.m. and as the counsel for petitioner was absent, cross-examination of PW1 was taken as nil. 6. All the aforementioned facts clearly disclose gross negligence on the part of petitioner in pursuing the matter. However, considering the fact that the case is filed for the guardianship of a child and for deciding the guardianship, Court is required to get full details with regard to the merits of the matter this Court considers desirable to allow both the writ petitions, however conditionally, so as to give fair opportunity to petitioner herein to cross-examine PW1. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) Both the writ petitions are allowed. (ii) The order that is rendered by the Court of IV Additional Principal Judge, Bengaluru dated 19.09.2025 on I.A.Nos.XVIII and XIX in G & WC No.185/2015 is set aside. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5174 WP No. 30472 of 2025 C/W WP No. 36195 of 2025 (iii) The Court of IV Additional Principal Judge, Bengaluru is directed to fix a date for appearance of PW1 so that petitioner herein can cross-examine the witness. However, the petitioner shall be permitted to cross-examine PW1 only on payment of costs of Rs.25,000/- to PW1 on her appearance. (iv) Entire cross-examination shall be concluded on the same day that is the day fixed by the Court for cross-examination of PW1. (v) Petitioner shall not seek time either for cross-examination or further cross-examination. However, in case the Court due to pressure of work or any other convincing reasons deems to adjourn the matter, the Court can do so. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE DS CT:VC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1