logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide

24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 Kar HC 149 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Karnataka
Case No : Writ Petition No. 4074 Of 2026 (GM-CPC)
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
Parties : Lakshmi Bai & Others Versus Puttamma @ Putti Bai @ Saraswathi Bai
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioners: C.S. Hiremath, Advocate. For the Respondents: ------
Date of Judgment : 12-02-2026
Head Note :-
Constitution of India - Article 227 -

Comparative Citation:
2026 KHC 8531,
Judgment :-

(Prayer: This W.P. is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to call for the entire records in O.S.No.1/2016 pending on the file of Hon’ble Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Kanakapura. and etc.)

Oral Order

1. This petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

          a) Call for the entire records in O.S.No.1/2016 pending on the file of Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Kanakapura.

          b) Issue directions to the Hon'ble trial court to dispose of the case within 6 months in O.S.No.1/2016, vide at Annexure - B, pending on the file of Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Kanakapura.

          c) Pass any other order, directions or relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the petitioners' case in the interest of justice and equity.

2. Petitioners/Defendant No.8 who is represented by her legal representatives are before this Court seeking a direction to the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kanakapura, in OS.No.1/2016 to dispose of the matter within 6 months.

3. I do not find any need or necessity to issue notice to the other defendants and plaintiffs who are respondents in this petition, as the innocuous prayer made is only for the expeditious disposal of the suit within six months.

4. The suit was filed in the year 2016, more specifically on 02.01.2016, seeking for the relief of declaration and for other consequential reliefs. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant No.8 who is represented by her legal representatives that the suit has still not reached the stage of recording evidence and even the issues have not been framed.

5. Under the circumstances, granting the relief sought by the petitioner to dispose of the matter within 6 months may not be feasible, and it may not be practically possible. Nevertheless, since the suit is of the year 2016 and we are in the year 2026, more than 10 years have lapsed, and nothing has proceeded in the original suit except for the issuance of notice. It is appalling to see that a suit of 10 years old is still at the preliminary stage of issuance of notice; pleadings are yet to be completed. Under the circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following order.

ORDER

          The petition is partly allowed.

          2. A writ of mandamus is issued directing the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kanakpura in OS No.1/2016, to dispose of the suit expeditiously.

          3. The trial Court is at liberty to impose exemplary costs on the parties seeking unnecessary adjournments, including the petitioners.

          4. Ordered accordingly.

 
  CDJLawJournal