- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2167 WP No. 105791 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 105791 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. RENUKAVVA W/O. LATE CHANNABASAPPA DODDALINGANNAVAR AGE. 44 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SHIRGANJI, TQ. HIREKERUR, DIST. HAVERI. 2. SHRI. RAMAPPA S/O. BASAPPA HONNATTI, AGE. 42 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. HALEGUNGARGOPPA, TQ. BYADGI, DIST. HAVERI. 3. SMT. SHAKUNTALA W/O. HANUMANTHAPPA KALAUTGAR, AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BARANGI, TQ. SORAB, DIST. SHIVAMOGA 4. SHRI. GONEPPA S/O. BASAPPA HONNATTI, AGE. 36 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. HALEGUNGARGOPPA, YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Date: 2026.02.18 10:45:07 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2167 WP No. 105791 of 2024 TQ. BYADGI, DIST. HAVERI. 5. SHRI. MANJAPPA S/O. BASAPPA HONNATTI, AGE. 42 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. HALEGUNGARGOPPA, TQ. BYADGI, DIST. HAVERI. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. B. V. SOMAPUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI BASAPPA S/O. CHANNABASAPPA UPPAR ALIAS HONNATTI AGE. 64 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. HALEGUNGARGOPPA, TQ. BYADGI, DIST. HAVERI, NOW AT HALE HONNATTI, TQ. RANEBENNUR, DIST. HAVERI. …RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, A) ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING / SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 01/07/2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BYADGI IN O.S. NO. 80/2020 ON I.A. NO. 8 FILED BY DEFENDANT NO. 1 / RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE A AND DISMISS THE SAID I.A. NO. 8, B)ISSUE ANY SUCH OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTIONS OR ANY RELIEFS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2167 WP No. 105791 of 2024 CORAM: THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order dated 01.07.2024 passed on I.A. No.8 in O.S. No.80/2020 by the Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Byadgi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial Court’, for short), the plaintiffs are before this Court. 2. The facts of the case are that, the plaintiffs had filed the suit seeking partition and separate possession. The father of the plaintiffs i.e.defendant No.1 was placed ex parte on 01.03.2021. Defendant No.1 filed I.A. No.8 on 08.11.2023 seeking to set-aside the order dated 01.03.2021 and to permit him to prosecute the matter. By order impugned dated 01.07.2024, the Trial Court has passed an order as under: “Case called out the counsel for the Plaintiff has filed objection. Heard from both side. The D-1 has shown sufficient reasons to allow the I.A. No. 8 on cost of Rs. 2,000/-“ 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/plaintiffs submits that, the Trial Court has not passed a detailed order. No reasons are stated in the order impugned. It is submitted that, when an I.A. is filed with an inordinate delay, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2167 WP No. 105791 of 2024 the Trial Court ought to have given the reasons, on that ground alone, the order impugned needs to be set-aside. On a query from this Court, it is submitted that, the matter is at the stage of evidence. It is submitted that, no formal application is filed by defendant No.1 who is the father of the plaintiffs. 4. Having heard the learned counsel on either side, perused the material on record. This is a suit of the year 2020. The order impugned is dated 01.07.2024. There is no stay granted by this Court and now the matter has come up before this Court for hearing. It is a suit for partition and separate possession. The defendant No.1 is none other than the father of the petitioners/plaintiffs. In a suit for partition, the rights of all the parties shall be crystallized and in that manner, it can be taken to a logical end basing on the evidence that is adduced by the parties. The Trial Court should provide an opportunity to the parties which will put an end to the litigation. As rightly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/plaintiffs, the Trial Court has failed to assign any reasons while passing the order dated 01.07.2024. Right from 01.07.2024 till 2026, the suit has been proceeding and it is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2167 WP No. 105791 of 2024 currently at the stage of recording evidence of the parties. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case where the suit is for partition and it is only an ex parte order that is set-aside and no prejudice would be caused to the plaintiffs, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the matter. Hence, this Court is passing the following: ORDER (i) Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. (ii) All I.As. in this writ petition shall stand closed. Sd/- JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI RH CT: CNB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4