- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14950 WP No. 8218 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8218 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. G. RAJU S/O. GOVINDAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 228 KADUGODI VILLAGE BIDARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU EAST TALUK -560 067. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DASTAGIR J A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. B. RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS S/O. LATE BANDAPPA R/O. CHIKKABANAHALLI VILLAGE KANNADMANGALA POST BENGALURU EAST TALUK -560 067. 2. SRI. DEVENDRAPPA B. M S/O. H. B. MALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT C/O. SRI. ANJENAPPA OPP. MUNISHAWARI LAYOUT KADDUGODI, BENGLAURU-560 067. SRI. V. SRINIVASACHAR S/O. LATE VENAKTARAMANACHAR SINCE DIED BY LR’S Digitally signed by DHANALAKSHMI MURTHY Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14950 WP No. 8218 of 2026 3. SMT. SUNANDAMMA W/O. LATE SRINIVACHAR AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. 4. SRI. C. S. MURALIDHARA S/O. V. SRINIVASACHAR AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS. 5. SRI. C. S. KESHAVA MURTHY S/O. V. SRINIVASACHAR AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 TO 5 ARE R/AT NO.20, MANASA NILAYA CHIKKABANAHALLI VILLAGE KADUGODI POST, BIDARAHALLI BENGALURU EAST TALUK.-560 067. 6. SRI. G. SRINIVASA S/O. GOVINDAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT NO.228, YELLAREDDY CIRCLE KADUGODI, BENGALURU -560 067. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. S AISHWARYA., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MANJUNATHA K V, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24-02-2026 PASSED ON I.A NO.6 AND 7 IN O.S.NO.1855/2015 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT AT BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW I.A.NO.6 AND 7 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND E AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14950 WP No. 8218 of 2026 ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed by defendant No.5 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 24.02.2026 passed on I.A. Nos.6 and 7 in O.S. No.1855/2015 by the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bengaluru, whereby the applications filed by defendant No.5 for recalling and reopening the evidence of PW1 were rejected. 2. The plaintiffs have filed a suit in O.S. No.1855/2015 for specific performance of contract. Defendant No.5 is a purchaser. On service of summons, he appeared and filed his written statement. On 23.01.2025, when the evidence of PW1 was completed, defendant No.5 did not cross-examine PW1. Hence, the evidence of PW1 was closed. 3. Thereafter, after about six months, an application was filed on 18.06.2025 seeking recall and reopening of the evidence of PW1. On 25.09.2025, PW1 was present - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14950 WP No. 8218 of 2026 along with counsel and the trial Court recalled PW1. On that day, defendant No.5 was absent. Hence, the cross- examination of PW1 was taken as ‘nil’. Again, on 01.12.2025, the application was rejected and the fifth defendant’s evidence was taken as nil. Now, the matter is posted for arguments. 4. In spite of giving sufficient opportunities, defendant No.5 has not cross-examined PW-1. 5. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed. 6. However, in the interest of justice, in order to give one more opportunity to the petitioner/defendant No.5, he is permitted to cross-examine PW-1 on 12.03.2026. The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1/plaintiff No.1 has assured that PW-1 will be present before the trial Court on 12.03.2026. Defendant No.5 is permitted to cross-examine PW-1 on the said date. If there is any difficulty on that day, the trial Court may fix another date. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14950 WP No. 8218 of 2026 On that day, without fail, defendant No.5 shall cross- examine PW-1. 7. The same is subject to the condition that defendant No.5 shall pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- to the plaintiffs on the day fixed for cross-examination. If he fails to pay Rs.25,000/-, the order passed by the trial Court closing the evidence shall hold good. 8. The trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible, and in any event not later than six months from today. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 84