Sri. K v Ashwathanarayana Vs Smt. Shwetha N R

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:2027 CRP No. 105 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.105 OF 2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SRI. K.V.ASHWATHANARAYANA S/O. LATE .K.R VENKATESH MURTHY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT NO.145/21, SECOND MAIN ROAD THIRD CROSS, CHAMARAJAPET BENGALURU-560 018.

¶7

ALSO AT GROUND FLOOR PRIVATELY NUMBERED AS 5, PROPERTY BEARING NO.45, 3^RD CROSS, CHAMARAJAPET BENGALURU -560 018

¶8

&PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI.RAMESHCHANDRA., ADVOCATE)

¶10

Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

AND:

¶12

SMT.SHWETHA N R W/O.MR. N. R. CHANDHAKULA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

¶13

MR N. R. CHANDHAKULA S/O. SRI G. NARAYANA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

¶14

MR.N.R.GAGAN, S/O. MR. N. R. CHANDHAKULA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS.

¶15

ALL ARE R/AT NO.1 (OLD NO.43/1)

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:2027 CRP No. 105 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

SECOND FLOOR, SUSHEELA MAIN ROAD, CHIKKAMAVALLI BENGALURU-560004.

¶20

& RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT.NIKITHA N., ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3)

¶22

THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.115 OF CPC., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12.03.2024 PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS , ALLOW THIS REVISION AND AFTER SETTING ASIDE THE CONDITIONAL ORDER OF THE TRIAL COURT DATED 18^TH JANUARY 2025.ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDL.SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MOTOR CLAIMS TRIBUNAL BENGALURU.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

This Civil Revision Petition is filed at the hands of the

¶27

original defendant and the petitioner in Misc. Case No.40/2024 arising in S.C.No.1228/2022 passed by the learned XXI Addl. Small Causes Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-23) dated 18.01.2025.

¶28

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶29

the suit filed by the respondents herein was decreed placing the defendant exparte. Therefore, the defendant

¶30

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:2027 CRP No. 105 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

filed Miscellaneous Petition in Misc.No.40/2024 and the

¶33

learned Judge while allowing the petition has imposed cost of Rs.5,000/- and while restoring the Small Causes case directions are issued to the defendant to deposit arrears of

¶34

rent of Rs.40,000/- along with cost. The petitioner is aggrieved by that portion of the order where cost and arrears of rent are directed to be deposited.

¶35

On the previous occasion, the learned Counsel for the petitioner had placed reliance on a judgment of the Hon9ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijay Kumar

¶36

Madan and others Vs. R.N.Gupta Technical Education

¶37

Society and others reported in AIR 2002 SC 2082 , where it was held that while exercising powers under Order IX Rule 7 of CPC, to set aside exparte order, the Court has power to impose costs to put the defendant on terms, however, the Court cannot pass an order which would have the effect of placing the defendant in a situation more worse off than what he would have been if he had not applied under Order IX Rule 7 of CPC. In that

¶38

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:2027 CRP No. 105 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

view of the matter, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the portion of the impugned order where costs are imposed and the direction is given to deposit arrears of rent of Rs.40,000/- may be quashed and set aside.

¶41

Learned Counsel for the respondents-plaintiffs however submits that in the decision which is relied upon by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, it is clearly stated that the Court has power to impose costs.

¶42

Having regard to the contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondents, this Court is of the considered opinion that the costs of Rs.5,000/- imposed by the Trial Court cannot be found fault with. However, insofar as the directions issued for deposit of arrears of rent is concerned, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case referred to by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that such directions could not have been issued by the Trial Court. Even

¶43

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:2027 CRP No. 105 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

otherwise, it is always open for the plaintiffs to file such an application seeking directions to deposit arrears of rent. While granting such liberty to the plaintiffs to move an application seeking such direction to the defendant to deposit the arrears of rent, this Civil Revision Petition is partly allowed while setting aside that portion of the order where directions are issued to the petitioner herein to deposit arrears of rent. Rest of the order is upheld.

¶46

Consequently, the subsequent order dated 31.01.2025 passed by the learned XXI Additional Small Causes Judge, Bengaluru is set aside. The small causes case S.C.No.1228/2022 stands restored to its original file before the learned XXI Additional Small Cause Judge and MACT, Bangalore. The petitioner undertakes to deposit costs of Rs.5,000/- before the Trial Court on the next date of hearing.

¶47

Sd/(R DEVDAS) JUDGE

¶48

JT/-

¶49

CT:SW

Sri. K v. Ashwathanarayana v Smt. Shwetha N R

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. K v. Ashwathanarayana v Smt. Shwetha N R

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri P S Rajegowda Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Nagaraju Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Chowdareddy Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Sri Surya Narayana Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. K C Venkatesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. H.R. Srinivasa Vs the Deputy Director of Land Records