Disposed¶6

Sri H S Ramesh v. Sri G Umaram

Karnataka HC27 Apr 2026WP/13568/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP No. 13568 of 2026 (GM-CPC); High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; Justice H.T. Narendra Prasad; Article 227 Constitution of India; writ of certiorari; Order XVII Rule 1 CPC; Section 151 CPC; adjournment request rejected; parties not heard before judgment; final arguments; O.S. No. 3317/2017; suit for permanent injunction; XVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge Bengaluru; judgment fixed for 28.04.2026; disposed of with clarification to allow arguments before judgment.

What did the court decide?

Clarification/direction that on 28.04.2026 the trial court may permit the parties to argue the case and thereafter pass judgment in accordance with law; writ petition disposed of with this clarification. ¶6

Sri H S Ramesh Vs Sri G Umaram — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:23220 WP No. 13568 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 13568 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI H S RAMESH SON OF HANUMANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 25, 12TH MAIN SHIVANAGARA, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU 560010.

¶10

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. ASHOKA T., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by DHANALAKSHMI MURTHY Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA

¶13

SRI G UMARAM AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O GENARAN SENCHA S.H R/AT NO.203/6, 5^TH CROSS 1^ST MAIN, K.N. EXTENSION YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU 560009.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

(BY SRI. B M KUSHALAPPA., ADVOCATE FOR C/R)

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER, SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 04.04.2026 PASSED BY THE TRIAL COURT IN O.S. NO. 3317/2017 (ANNEXURE-B), AND DIRECT THE TRIAL COURT TO AFFORD A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE PETITIONER TO ADDRESS FINAL ARGUMENTS AND ETC.

¶17

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

¶18

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:23220 WP No. 13568 of 2026

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

This writ petition is filed by the plaintiff under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 04.04.2026 passed on an application filed by the plaintiff under Order XVII Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, ‘CPC’) in O.S. No. 3317/2017, by the XVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (for short, ‘the trial court’), rejecting the request for adjournment and posting the matter for judgment.

¶24

For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the trial court.

¶25

The petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction. Upon appearance, the defendant filed a written statement. Based on the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the issues. After the parties adduced evidence, the matter was posted for arguments on

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:23220 WP No. 13568 of 2026

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

26.02.2026. On that day, in view of the Presiding Officer

¶29

being on leave, the matter was not taken up and was subsequently posted to 04.04.2026.

¶30

On 04.04.2026, the petitioner/plaintiff sought time; however, the said request was rejected, and the matter was posted for judgment on 28.04.2026.

¶31

Since no opportunity has been given to the parties to advance arguments, this Court is of the opinion that, on 28.04.2026, the trial court may permit the parties to argue the case and thereafter pass judgment in accordance with law.

¶32

With the above clarification, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶33

Sd/(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

¶34

¶35

LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 33

Sri H S Ramesh v. Sri G Umaram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri H S Ramesh v. Sri G Umaram

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

Varalakshmi M N Vs Rukmini

Sri. Chandan. P Vs Sri. Papanna Balaji

Sri.G.K.Dhanaraj Vs Smt.Gowramma

Suresh M Vs Smt. Nirmala

Sri C R Nagaraju Vs Sri Mruthunjaya

Sri Pastor v Srinivasa Vs Sri K Ramesh Reddy