Sri. Govindaiah Vs Sri. Rangaswamy

SRI. GOVINDAIAH S/O LATE THIMMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT ARASALASANDRA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, PIN-562 123.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. SATEESH.B., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

SRI. RANGASWAMY S/O LATE NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/A THOTADAGUDDADAHALLI, DASANAPURA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU-562 173.

¶15

SMT. GURAMMA W/O. SRI. GOVINDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,

¶16

SMT. LATHA D/O SRI. GOVINDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:6821 WP No. 33525 of 2019

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

RESPONDENTS NO.2 & 3 ARE R/A ARASALASANDRA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, PIN-562 123.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. G.NATARAJ., ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 & R3 ARE SERVED)

¶23

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN O.S.NO.181/2015 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT NELAMANGALA, QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.07.2019 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT NELAMANGALA, IN O.S.NO.181/2015 AT ANNX-A ON THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER FILED U/S 151 OF CPC VIDE ANNX-C, AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER FOR PERMISSION TO FILE WRITTEN STATEMENT AS PRAYED FOR, ETC.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:6821 WP No. 33525 of 2019

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

1. The present petition seeks to challenge an order

¶32

dated 10.07.2019, passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala, on I.A.No.5 in O.S. No.181/2015[hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned Order”]. By the Impugned Order, an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, filed by the petitioner/defendant No.1 has been rejected.

¶33

On the last date of hearing, after hearing the parties, this Court had passed the following order:

¶34

“1..

¶35

2. The present petition seeks to challenge an order dated 10.07.2019 passed in O.S.No.181/2015 by the Court of the Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Nelamangala. By the impugned order, an application under Section 151 of the CPC for condonation of delay of 1159 days in filing the written statement was rejected by the learned trial Court by giving a finding that the petitioner/defendant No.1 was served on 16.10.2015. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared before the Court on 25.11.2015 through his counsel. However he did not file his written statement for the next 3 years and when the matter was posted for arguments on 04.01.2019, the petitioner/defendant No. 1 came up with an application for condonation of delay in filing his written statement.

¶36

4 -

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:6821 WP No. 33525 of 2019

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the written statement could not be filed because of the ill-health of the Petitioner/defendant No.1. He further submits that the delay should be condoned in the interest of equity and he may be permitted to contest the matter by putting him to some terms. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that inadvertently the documents could not be placed before the trial court. However he requests for 3 weeks time to place those documents on record before this Court along with an affidavit.

¶40

4. Since the matter has been pending for the last more than 5 years and trial Court proceedings have been stayed by an order of 22.11.2019, the petitioner is granted as a final opportunity of 3 weeks to place the documents on record.

¶41

5. List this matter on 05.02.2026.”

¶42

The learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant

¶43

No.1, has, this morning, filed an affidavit of the petitioner/defendant No.1, setting out that after he received notice in the civil suit in O.S.No.181/2015, he appeared through Advocate, however, thereafter, he fell ill and took treatment in the local Hospital for his illness. In addition, he further submits he is an Agriculturist and person of very poor means. He was not aware of the Court proceedings and he was not guided correctly by his Advocate. He submits that the non-filing of the Written

¶44

5 -

¶45

NC: 2026:KHC:6821 WP No. 33525 of 2019

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

Statement was not intentional but due to bona fide reasons beyond his control.

¶48

The learned counsel for the respondent No.1/plaintiff fairly submits, on instructions, that in the interest of expediency, subject to some terms, the Written Statement of the petitioner/defendant No.1 be taken on record and directions be passed that the trial be expedited.

¶49

The learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant No.1, on instructions from the petitioner/defendant No.1, submits that this suggestion is acceptable.

¶50

Accordingly, and in view of the consensus between

¶51

the parties, the following directions are passed:

¶52

(i) The Impugned Order dated 10.07.2019, passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Nelamangala, on I.A.No.5 in O.S.No.181/2015 is set aside;

¶53

(ii) The Written Statement already filed by the petitioner/ defendant No.1 before the learned Trial Court shall be

¶54

6 -

¶55

NC: 2026:KHC:6821 WP No. 33525 of 2019

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

taken on record, subject to payment of costs in a sum of

¶58

₹7,500/- [Rupees Seven Thousand Five Hundred]. The costs shall be paid to the respondent No.1/plaintiff, on the next date of hearing before the learned Trial Court.

¶59

(iii) The respondent No.1/plaintiff is permitted to file his Replication/rejoinder, within two weeks from today.

¶60

(iv) Let the parties appear before the learned Trial Court on 26.02.2026 .

¶61

It is clarified that this Court has not examined the matter on merits. The rights and contentions of both parties shall be kept open to be agitated before the learned Trial Court.

¶62