The necessity for framing additional issues is contingent upon their relevance and the completeness of existing issues for a fair adjudication.

ORAL ORDER

This petition by the defendant in O.S.No.38/2015 on the file of the XXXI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, is directed against the impugned order dated 05.03.2024, whereby the application I.A.No.12 filed by the petitioner-defendant seeking framing of two additional issues was rejected by the trial Court.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondents-plaintiffs instituted the aforesaid suit against the petitioner-defendant for permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable properties. The said suit having been contested by the petitioner, the trial Court has framed the following issues;

“(i) Whether the plaintiff proves that he is in lawful possession of the suit schedule property as on the date of filing the suit?

(ii) Whether the plaintiff proves the alleged obstruction caused by the defendants?

(iii) Whether the suit is barred under Order 2 Rule 2 of CPC?

(iv) Whether the suit is barred by limitation?

(v) Whether the suit in the present form is maintainable?

(vi) Whether the court fee paid by the plaintiff is proper?

(vii) What order or decree?”

Subsequently, at the stage of further cross-examination of PW-1, the petitioner filed the instant application which was opposed by the respondents and culminated in the impugned order rejecting the application as hereunder;

“ ORDER ON INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO XII

As per the directions issued by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P. No. 12190/2023 dated 27.6.2023, this suit is to be disposed of on or before 21.12.2023 and since it could not have been possible for disposal of the said suit on or before 21.12.2023. my learned Predecessor in office has addressed a letter to the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka on 21.12.2023 for extension of time for disposal of the said suit. When the matter stood posted for hearing on IA No 11 the defendant has filed Interlocutory Application No XII under Order XIV Rule 3(a) and (c) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying this Court to frame additional issues mentioned in the application

2. In support of the above said application at IA No. XII.the defendant has sworn to an affidavit and stated that the plaintiff has filed this suit for the reliefs of permanent injunction against the Defendant and or his Agents, anybody claiming under through him from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule properties, to restrain the Defendant from interfering with peaceful possession of the schedule properties at item 1 by the Plaintiff more fully described at item 1 of the schedule and prevent the Defendant from threatening or invading the Plaintiff's right in and over the schedule properties described as item 1 by way of permanent perpetual injunction, to Restrain the Defendant by issuing appropriate direction/injunction/ orders restraining the Defendant from presenting, prosecuting any matters oppressive and vexatious against the Plaintiff in respect of properties bearing No. 1, 1/1, 1 /2,1 /3, 2,3,4,5,6,7, and 8 situated at Jayamahal Road, flangalore-560 046, formerly in Survey Nos 32 and 38 (Old Survey Nos 66 and 65) measuring 19 acre and 18 guntas, respectively in the village of Ooparapad in the Ulsoor Hobli Bangalore with Bungalow. out- house and other building thereon, formerly known as "Arani Hall" now known as "Jayamahal Palace Hotel" together with the fixture thereto. It is further stated that he has filed W.P. No.43994/2018 before the Hon'ble High Court to set aside the Order of this Cou