- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10128 WP No. 5961 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 5961 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: MUNINARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, S/O. LATE PATEL MUNISWAAPPA, R/ AT VEERABHADRASWAMY TEMPLE STREET, NEAR WATER TANK, KOTHANUR VILLAGE AND POST, BANGALORE EAST, BANGALORE-560 077. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GANESH K N., ADVOCATE) AND: M SHANKAR SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR'S 1. SMT. SUMITHRA, W/O.LATE M.SHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, 2. KUMARI SUSHANKITHA S D/O.LATE M.SHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT. NO.138, VENUGOPALASWAMY TEMPLE STREET, KOTHANUR, S.R.K.NAGAR POST, BANGALORE - 560 077. 3. M.MUNIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, S/O.LATE PATEL MUNISWAAPPA, R/AT VEERABHADRASWAMY Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10128 WP No. 5961 of 2025 TEMPLE STREET, BANGALORE EAST, NEAR WATER TANK, KOTHANUR VILLAGE AND POST, BANGALORE -560 077. 4. THE SUB-REGISTRAR SHIVAJINAGAR BENGALURU – 560 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.V.HEMALATHA, AGA FOR R4; NOTICE TO R1 TO R3 ARE DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 10.02.2025 PASSED ON APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC PASSED BY THE III ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE BENGALURU RURAL DIST AT BENGALURU IN OS NO. 812/2012 AT ANNEXURE-A AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC AT ANNEXURE- B ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE BENGALURU RURAL DIST AT BENGALURU IN OS NO. 812/2012. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER This petition by the defendant in O.S.No.812/2012 is directed against the impugned order, whereby the application dated 10.02.2025 filed by the petitioner to issue exemption letter to register the final decree in relation to the share of the petitioner - defendant No.1 was rejected by the trial Court. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10128 WP No. 5961 of 2025 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for respondent No.4 and perused the material on record. For the order proposed, notice to respondent Nos.1 to 3 is dispensed with. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the trial Court committed an error in failing to consider and appreciate that under identical circumstances, this Court in the case of Sri.K.S.Mahadevaiah and Anr., Vs. The State of Karnataka and Anr., in W.P.No.421/2009 dated 19.03.2009, held as under: “Though this petition is posted for preliminary hearing, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for both the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal having regard to the nature of relief sought. 2. Petitioners in this petition have sought for quashing the impugned endorsement dated 08th December 2008 issued by the second respondent vide reference for refusing to register the final decree of partition passed in O.S.No.1547/2008 by the Hon'ble Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore for non-production of exemption letter vide Annexures B & C respectively and to direct him to register the said final decree of partition vide Annexures A & A1 forthwith without insisting the exemption letter from the Hon'ble Court below. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10128 WP No. 5961 of 2025 3. I have heard learned counsel appearing for petitioners and learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents. 4. The only grievance of the petitioners in the instant writ petition is that, the dispute between the parties was settled and the matter was disposed of by way of compromise petition before the Lok Adalath. In view of the order passed by the Lok Adalath pursuant to the compromise petition filed by the parties, they have presented the paper for registration before the second respondent. In pursuance of the decree, their request has been turned down and papers has been returned, on the ground that they must get the exemption certificate from the learned Principal Civil judge (Senior Division), Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore before whom, the matter was disposed of in the Lok Adalath. Therefore, petitioners have filed the necessary application, I.A. No. 1/2008 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in O.S.No. 1547/2008 on the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, seeking for issue of Exemption letter. The said application had come up for consideration before the said Court on 1st January 2009 and the Court below rejected the said application holding that, the said Court was not executing any instrument/document before the Sub Registrar. Assailing the correctness of the impugned communications issued by the second respondent and the order passed by the Court below, petitioners herein - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10128 WP No. 5961 of 2025 felt necessitated to present the instant writ petition seeking appropriate reliefs, as stated supra. 5. After careful perusal of the impugned communications vide Annexures B and C, it is seen that, the request of the petitioner has not been entirely turned down or rejected in toto. Only the papers are returned to re-present the same after getting the exemption certificate from the Court of Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore as provided under the relevant provision of the Civil Procedure Code for exemption at the time of executing the documents. The said Court has authorized one of the Sheristdars as has been the practice in several matters including the said Court (predecessor of the same Court). Unfortunately, without application of mind, they have unnecessarily dragged on the petitioners from pillar to post by passing the order impugned. At this stage, the learned Government Pleader for respondents submitted and placed before the Court similar order passed by another Presiding Officer of the same Court dated 31st July 2008, wherein the said Officer has issued the certificate/letter stating that, if the parties wants to get the final decree registered, and if presented for registration, the same can be considered as per Rules. In the instant case, the Presiding Officer has not considered the prayer sought for by petitioners and rejected the same without any justification and on hyper technical grounds. The said approach of the Court below is neither appreciable nor the same is permissible. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10128 WP No. 5961 of 2025 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the order impugned passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore dated 1st January 2009 passed on I.A.I/2008 in O.S. 1547/2008 is hereby set aside and the matter stands remitted back to the said Court to reconsider the application filed by petitioners and dispose of the same, as expeditiously as possible, at anyrate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7. So far as the first prayer sought for by petitioners seeking quashing of the impugned communications vide Annexures B and C is concerned, it can be seen that, the same are not totally rejected and are only returned for resubmission after obtaining the exemption letter from the Court below. Therefore, the question of quashing the said communications does not arise. Needless to mention exemption that, after obtaining the certificate/letter from the Court below, the petitioners may represent the papers before the second respondent. In case the papers are re-presented for registration in accordance with law, the second respondent is directed to register the same and take appropriate decision and dispose of the same, in accordance with law, 36 expeditiously as possible.” - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10128 WP No. 5961 of 2025 4. Under these circumstances, impugned order is erroneous and contrary to the provisions of the Registration Act, warranting interference by this Court in the present petition. 5. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is hereby allowed. ii) The impugned order dated 10.02.2025 in O.S.No.812/2012 on the file of III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, is hereby set aside. iii) Application filed under Section 151 of CPC vide Annexure-B is hereby allowed in view of Rule 40 of the Karnataka Registration Rules, 1965. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE MDS List No.: 3 Sl No.: 39