IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 10873 OF 2021 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

M/S VIMS COCOON MATERNITY AND SURGICAL HOSPITAL PVT. LTD.

NO.262/A, 2ND CROSS VIJAYALAKSHMI COLONY KADUGODI, WHITEFIELD BENGALURU - 560 067 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR DR. K.M. VEERAPPA REDDY.

…PETITIONER (BY SMT. AMRITHA A. NAVADE, ADV., FOR SRI PRASHANTH CHANDRA S.N, ADV.)

AND:

1. SRI T. SHAKER REDDY S/O LATE SRI A THIMMAIAH REDDY RESIDING AT NO.621

4TH CROSS, HAL 3RD STAGE Digitally signed by BANGALORE - 560 075.

NANDINI M S Location:

HIGH COURT 2. SRI M. SRINIVAS OF S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA KARNATAKA RESIDIN GAT NO.1154 1ST CROSS, 1ST MAIN HAL 3RD STAGE NEW THIPPASANDRA BANGALORE - 560 075.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI G. VEERENDRA BABA, ADV., FOR R-1; NOTICE TO R-2 DEFERRED FOR TIME BEEING V/O DTD 30.09.2021)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.11.2019 PASSED BY XV ADDL.CITY CIVIL JUDGE, (CCH-3) AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the plaintiff with a prayer to set aside the order dated 07.11.2019 passed on I.A.No.II to IV in O.S.No.899 of 2019 by the Court of XV Addl. City Civil &

Sessions Judge, Bengaluru..

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Petitioner herein has filed O.S.No.899/2019 before the Court of XV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore under Order XXXVII Rule 1 and 2 of CPC with a prayer for directing the defendants to pay a sum of Rs.60,77,500/- with interest at 18% per annum on Rs.55,00,000/- from the date of suit till the date of realization. In the said suit, the defendant Nos.1 and 2 had appeared before the trial Court on 25.02.2019, after the suit summons under Form No.4 in Appendix-B of CPC was served on them and had filed two applications under Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) r/w Section 151 of CPC namely I.A.Nos.II and III respectively with a prayer to permit them to defend their case. Thereafter, the plaintiff had filed summons in Form 4(A) in Appendix-B and said summons was served on the defendants and on 25.04.2014 defendant no.1 had filed yet another application under Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) of CPC namely I.A.No.IV seeking for the very same relief which was sought in I.A.No.II and III. These applications were opposed by the plaintiff and the trial Court, vide the order impugned has allowed the applications.

Being aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner / plaintiff having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that after Form No.4(A) in Appendix-B of CPC was served on the defendants in compliance of Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) of CPC, application under Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) r/w Section 151 of CPC was filed only by defendant no.1 and not by defendant no.2. Application of defendant no.2 was prior to compliance of Order XXXVII Rule 3 and Rule 4 of CPC by the plaintiff and therefore the said application was premature. The trial Court was therefore not justified in permitting defendant no.2 to defend the suit.

5. Order XXXVII provides for summary procedure in certain classes of suits. Order XXXVII Rule 3(4) & 3(5) of CPC reads as follows:-

"Rule 3. Procedure for the appearance of the defendant XXX..

(4). If the defendant enters an appearance, the plaintiff shall thereafter serve on the defendant a summons for judgment in Form No. 4A in Appendix B or such other Form as may be prescribed from time to time, returnable not less than ten days from the date of service supported by an affidavit verifying the cause of action and the amount claimed and stating that in his belief there is no defence to the suit.

(5). "The defendant may, at any time within ten days from the service of such summons for ju