Madhukar Angur vs Alliance Business School - Writ Petition

## Unlock Advanced Research with PRISM AI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

• Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc -... Upgrade to Premium [Cites 3, Cited by 0 ] ### Karnataka High Court

Mr. Madhukar G Angur vs M/S Alliance Business School on 18 March, 2026

Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad

Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad

-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:16071
WP No. 4588 of 2026

             HC-KAR

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                      DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
                                    BEFORE
               THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
                  WRIT PETITION NO. 4588 OF 2026 (GM- [CPC](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/161831507/))
            BETWEEN:
            MR. MADHUKAR G ANGUR
            AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
            S/O SHRIGUDDAPPAANGUR
            NO 803, G-BLOCK, MANTRIESPANA
            NEAR SAKRA WORLD HOSPITAL
            OUTER RING ROAD, KARIYAMMANA AGRAHARA
            BELLANDUR, BANGALORE-560103.
                                                    ...PETITIONER
            (BY SRI. SRIVASTHAVA H K., ADVOCATE)
            AND:
            1. M/S ALLIANCE BUSINESS SCHOOL
               (A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
               THE PROVISION OF THE INDIAN
               COMPANIES ACT, 1956) A SECTION 25
               COMPANY SECTION 8 UNDER THE ACT OF 2013)
               AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT CHIKKA
               HAGADE, ANEKAL- CHANDAPURA MAIN ROAD
               BANGALORE-560103, BY ITS REGISTRAR.

Digitally signed by
DHANALAKSHMI 2. N. RAMAKRISHNA
MURTHY S/O NARAYANA REDDY
Location: HIGH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
COURTOF R/AT GUDDAHATTI VILLAGE
KARNATAKA
ATTIBELE HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT.

            3.     MRS.PAVANA DIBBUR
                   D/O DIBBUR KUMAR
                   AGED AT 47 YEARS
                   R/AT NO. 528, 5TH CROSS
                   HMT LAYOUT, R.T. NAGAR
                   BANGALORE- 560032
                                                    ...RESPONDENTS
            (BY SRI.CYRIL PRASAD PAIS., ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)
                           -2-
                                      NC: 2026:KHC:16071
                                    WP No. 4588 of 2026

HC-KAR

 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER [ARTICLE 227](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1331149/) OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT QUASHING
THE ORDER DATED 03.12.2025 AND RESTORE THE WRITTEN
STATEMENT IN BEARING O.S NO. 317/2018 PENDING (IA
NO.9) IN THE FILE OF PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
ANEKAL, BENGALURU DISTRICT AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

                    ORAL ORDER 1.      In this writ petition, the petitioner-defendant No.2

has called in question the order dated 03.12.2025 passed

by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal

(hereinafter referred to as 'Trial Court' for short) on

I.A.No.9 filed under Section 151 of CPC in

O.S.No.317/2018 vide Annexure-A, whereby the said

application filed by the petitioner-defendant No.2 to recall

the order dated 25.09.2024 has been rejected.

1. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred

to as per their ranking before the Trial Court in Original

Suit.

-3-

NC: 2026:KHC:16071 WP No. 4588 of 2026 HC-KAR

1. The plaintiff-respondent No.1 has instituted a suit for

declaration. Upon service of summons, the defendants

appeared through counsel but failed to file their written

statements. After a lapse of more than five years, the

defendants filed a written statement along with an

application for condonation of delay. The Trial Court, by

order dated 22.08.2024, allowed the application and

permitted the filing of the written statement subject to

payment of costs of Rs.2,000/-. However, as the said

costs were not paid, the written statement was discarded

by the Trial Court by order dated 25.09.2024. Being

aggrieved by the same, petitioner-defendant No.2 filed

I.A.No.9 under Section 151 of CPC to recall the order

dated 25.09.2024. The Trial Court by impugned order

dated 03.12.2025 rejected the said I.A.No.9. Being

aggrieved by the same, the petitioner-defendant No.2 is

before this Court.

1. As the cost directed by the Trial Court was not paid,

the written statement came to be discarded. Though -4- NC: 2026:KHC:16071 WP No. 4588 of 2026 HC-KAR

Defendant No.2 (the petitioner herein) had been granted

permission to file the written statement on payment of

cost of Rs.2,000/-, the said condition was not complied

with. However, in the interest of justice, I am of the

considered opinion that this writ petition deserves to be

allowed, subject to certain conditions.

1. Accordingly, the following order is passed:

ORDER

a) The writ petition is allowed.

b) The order dated 03.12.2025 passed by the Trial

Court on I.A.No.9 filed under section 151 of CPC in

O.S.No.317/2018 vide Annexure-A is set aside.

c) I.A.No.9 filed by the petitioner-defendant No.2

is allowed, subject to the condition that the

petitioner-defendant No.2 shall pay costs of

Rs.15,000/- to respondent No.1-plaintiff on the next

date of hearing in O.S.No.317/2018, i.e.,

23.03.2026.
-5-

NC: 2026:KHC:16071 WP No. 4588 of 2026 HC-KAR

d) In the event of failure to pay the said cost on

    the said date, the impugned order passed by the Trial

    Court shall stand restored.

Sd/-

(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD)
JUDGE

HA
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4