N Vasanthakumari Vs Sri P Radhakrishanaiah Shetty

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN O.S.NO.695/2014 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU CITY (CCH-25) AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.09.2021 PASSED ON IA U/S 151 OF CPC SEEKING REOPEN THE CASE OF THE PLAINTIFF TO LEAD FURTHER EXAMINATION IN CHIEF AND IA UNDER ORDER 18 RULE 17 CPC SEEKING TO RECALL PW1 TO LEAD FURTHER EXAMINATION IN CHIEF AND ALSO FILED IA UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 14 OF CPC TO PRODUCE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS (IMPUGNED AS ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE IA U/S 151 OF THE CPC SEEKING REOPEN THE CASE OF THE PLAINTIFF TO LEAD FURTHER EXAMINATION IN CHIEF (ANNEXURE-D), IA UNDER ORDER 18 RULE 17 CPC SEEKING TO RECALL PW1 TO LEAD FURTHER EXAMINATION IN CHIEF (ANNEXURE-E) AND ALSO FILED IA UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 14 OF CPC TO PRODUCED ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS ANNEXURE-F BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION.

¶30

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶31

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶32

3 -

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC:52355 WP No. 18181 of 2021

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

ORAL ORDER

¶36

Plaintiff is before this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to set aside the order dated 23.09.2021 passed on three applications filed on behalf of the plaintiff in O.S.No.695/2014 by the Court of III Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.

¶37

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶38

Petitioner has filed O.S.No.695/2014 before the

¶39

jurisdictional Civil Court at Bengaluru, seeking the relief to declare that she is entitled for 1/4^th share in the suit schedule properties and also to declare certain sale deeds executed by defendant nos.2, 3 & 5 in favour of defendant nos.6 & 7 as not binding on her share.

¶40

The contesting defendants have entered appearance and filed their written statement in the suit opposing the suit claim.

¶41

When the suit was at the stage of recording defendants evidence, three applications were filed on behalf of the plaintiffs under Section 151 CPC to re-open the case of the plaintiff to lead further examination-in-chief, under Order XVIII Rule 17

¶42

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:52355 WP No. 18181 of 2021

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

CPC to call PW-1 to lead further examination-in-chief, and under Order VII Rule 14 CPC seeking permission to produce four additional documents.

¶45

The said applications were opposed by the contesting defendants and the Trial Court vide the order impugned, has rejected the said applications. Aggrieved by the same, plaintiff is before this Court.

¶46

Perusal of the material on record would go to show that the aforesaid three applications were filed on the date on which defendants evidence was closed. Application under Order VII Rule 14 CPC is filed on behalf of the plaintiff seeking to permit her to produce four additional documents. The other two applications are filed to re-open the stage of the suit and recall PW-1 for leading further examination-in-chief for the purpose of marking the additional documents.

¶47

The four additional documents which are sought to be produced by the plaintiff are, the certified copy of the gift deed dated 22.12.2020 executed in favour of the plaintiff by defendant no.1 who is her father, certified copy of the plaint in

¶48

5 -

¶49

NC: 2025:KHC:52355 WP No. 18181 of 2021

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

O.S.No.4630/2011, certified copy of the order passed in W.P.Nos.52870-71/2016, and the certified copy of the judgment and decree dated 01.04.2016 passed in O.S.No.5739/2011.

¶52

The material on record would go to show that the gift deed dated 22.12.2010 was questioned by defendant no.1 before the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, and in the said proceedings, the gift deed was set aside and the said order passed by the Assistant Commissioner was challenged by the petitioner herein in W.P.Nos.52870-71/2016 which was disposed of on the basis of the settlement reported between the parties.

¶53

It is stated by the plaintiff that suit in O.S.No.4630/2011 is filed seeking ejectment of Chaluvaraju after the gift deed was executed in her favour in respect of the property which is the subject matter in O.S.No.4630/2011 and it is further stated that during the course of evidence, by mistake it is stated that O.S.No.5739/2011 was filed for partition, but actually it is a suit for permanent injunction.

¶54

6 -

¶55

NC: 2025:KHC:52355 WP No. 18181 of 2021

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

If the aforesaid documents are permitted to be produced by the plaintiff, no hardship would be caused to the other side.

¶58

The Trial Court has rejected the applications primarily for the reason that there is no pleading with regard to the documents which are now sought to be produced.

¶59

As observed herein above, the gift deed dated 22.12.2010 is an admitted document which was earlier questioned by defendant no.1 before the Assistant Commissioner.

¶60

So far as the other documents are concerned, they are the orders passed in the court proceedings. Under the circumstances, the Trial Court was not justified in rejecting applications filed by the plaintiff to permit her to produce additional documents and the get the same marked through PW-1. Therefore, the impugned order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the following order:

¶61

Writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 23.09.2021 passed on the three applications filed on behalf of

¶62

7 -

¶63

NC: 2025:KHC:52355 WP No. 18181 of 2021

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

the plaintiff in O.S.No.695/2014 by the Court of III Addl. City

¶66

Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is set aside. The prayer made in the said three applications are granted.

¶67

Since the suit is of the year 2014, the Trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than a period of six months from the date of receipt of

¶68

the certified copy of this order.

¶69

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶70

JUDGE

¶71

KK

¶72

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30

N Vasanthakumari v. Sri P Radhakrishanaiah Shetty

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N Vasanthakumari v. Sri P Radhakrishanaiah Shetty

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Mohini Kharvi Vs Sri. Dasa @ Minna Kharvi

Smt Pushpa C Kotian Vs Smt Indira

Sri C Venkateshappa Vs Sri Ramoji Rao

Sri. Vikram Prabhakar Vs Mr. Deepu Kumar S

Sri. M. Abdul Khuddus Vs Sri. Abdul Gafoor

Sri. M. G. Srinivas Vs Smt. Yellamma