- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2871 WP No. 4163 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4163 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. MOHAMED IBRAHIM, LATE MD MASTAN @ HATEEM, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS. 2. MOHAMMED ISMAIL, S/O LATE MD MASTAN @ HATEEM, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. 3. ABDUL KHALAQ, DEAD BY HIS LRS. GULSHEER UNNISSA, W/O LATE ABDUL KHALAQ, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS. 4. MOHAMMED DASTAGIR, S/O LATE ABDUL KHALAQ, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. 5. MEHARUNNISSA, D/O LATE ABDUL KHALAQ, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. 6. DAWOOD SAB, S/O LATE ABDUL KHALAQ, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS. Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2871 WP No. 4163 of 2022 7. MUBEEN UNNISSA, D/O LATE ABDUL KHALAQ, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. 8. SHABEEN UNNISSA, D/O LATE ABDUL KHALAQ, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS. 9. KHALEEL AHAMED, S/O LATE ABDUL KHALAQ, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS. THE PETITIONERS NO. 1 TO 9 R/O 9TH CROSS, MARALURU DINNE, TUMAKURU-572 105. 10. TAJUNNISSA, W/O LATE ABDUL SHUKUR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. 11. RIYAZ AHAMED, S/O LATE DAWOOD SAB, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. 12. BASHEER AHAMED, S/O LATE DAWOOD SAB, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT SATHAGHATTA VILLAGE, URDIGERE HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 140. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI INAYATHULLA SHARIFF K F, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHEIK AHAMED, DEAD BY HIS LRS. DILSHAD UNNISSAA, W/O LATE SHEIK AHAMED, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2871 WP No. 4163 of 2022 2. AFEEFA BANU, D/O LATE SHEIK AHAMED, W/O RIYAZ, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O URDIGERE VILLAGE, URDIGERE HOBLI, TUMKUR-572 140. 3. MOHAMMED SIDDIQ, S/O LATE SHEIK AHAMED, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS. 4. SALEEM UNNISSA, D/O LATE SHEIK AHAMED, W/O ARIF PASHA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O GOWRIBIDANUR TOWN AND TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DIST.-562 108. 5. ARIFULLA, S/O LATE SHEIK AHAMED, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. THE RESPONDENTS NO. 1, 3 & 5 ARE R/O SATHAGATTA VILLAGE, URDIGERE HOBLI, TUMKURU TALUK-572 140. 6. MD. GHOUSE, S/O LATE ABDUL SUBHAN, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS. 7. SHAIK ABDULLA @ BABU, S/O LATE ABDUL SUBHAN, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. 8. SHAIK MOHAMOOD @ MUNNA, LATE ABDUL SUBHAN, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS. 9. AYAZULLA KHAN, S/O AMMANULLA KHAN, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2871 WP No. 4163 of 2022 AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS. RESPONDENTS NO. 6 TO 9, R/AT SATHAGHATTA VILLAGE, URDIGERE HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 140. 10. ZAREEN UNNISSAA, D/O LATE ABDUL KHALAQ, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT SATHAGHATTA VILLAGE, URDIGERE HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 140. (NOTE: THE RESPONDENT NO.10 WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO JOINT THE PETITIONERS TO FILE THE INSTANT WRIT PETITION. HENCE SHE IS ARRANGED AS RESPONDENT IN THIS WRIT PETITION) …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO R-1, 2 & 5 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; NOTICE TO R-4 & R-6 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED 23.01.2025; NOTICE TO R-3 IS HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DATED 23.01.2025) THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN O.S.NO.199/2012 PERTAINING TO THE DISPOSAL OF THE IA FILED BY THE PETITIONERS UNDER ORDER VI RULE 17 AT ANNEXURE-E FROM THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT TUMAKURU DISPOSED ON 03.02.2022 AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE TRIAL COURT AT ANNEXURE-E DATED 03.02.2022 IN O.S.NO.199/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT TUMAKURU AND THEREBY ALLOW THE APPLICATION ANNEXURE-C FILED BY THE PETITIONERS FOR AMENDMENT OF PLAINT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2871 WP No. 4163 of 2022 ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by plaintiffs under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 03.02.2022 passed by the V Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Tumakuru, in O.S.No. 199/2012 whereby I.A. filed by the 5th plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC seeking amendment of plaint schedule has been rejected. 2. The plaintiffs have filed a suit for declaration of title and injunction. When the matter was posted for arguments, plaintiff No.5 filed the above application for amendment of the suit schedule property on the ground that by oversight, a typographical error was crept-in while mentioning the survey number in the Schedule. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the petitioners undertake that they will not adduce any evidence on the amendment and they only require to correct the survey number in the Schedule, since there was a typographical error. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2871 WP No. 4163 of 2022 4. In view of the above, the writ petition is required to be allowed. Accordingly, the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) Order dated 03.02.2022 passed by the V Additional Civil Judge & JMFC, Tumakuru, in O.S.No. 199/2012 is set aside. (iii) I.A.Filed by the 5th plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC is allowed and it is made clear that petitioners shall not be allowed to adduce any further evidence, on the amendment. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE VP