- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4995 WP No. 50651 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 50651 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: GANGADHAR N.S., S/O M.V.SHIVARUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT DEVINILAYA OPP. GOPI VENKATESHWARA KALYANAMANTAPA NELAMANGALA BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 123. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.MALLIKARJUN N.K., FOR SRI.SAMPATH A., ADVOCATE) AND: THE TAHSILDAR, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 123. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.BASAVARAJ GODACHI, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN OS NO.228/2015 FROM THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT NELAMANGALA AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 31.08.2019 WHICH IS ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-E IN IA NO.04. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4995 WP No. 50651 of 2019 ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.4 in O.S.No.228/2015 dated 31.08.2019 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nelamangala, the petitioner/plaintiff is before this Court. 2. The petitioner/plaintiff had filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant/Tahsildar from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. The defendant has filed the written statement denying the right and title of the plaintiff and he has stated that the document is a fictitious document and the property belongs to the Government. Thereafter, the defendant has come up with this application seeking amendment of the written statement and sought to amend the written statement stating that the defendant claims counterclaim and to delete entire para No.13, to that plaintiff has filed his objections. 3. The trial Court by order impugned had allowed I.A.No.4 observing that there can be no straight jacket formula for allowing or disallowing an amendment of pleadings. The trial Court had observed that the defendant sought for - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4995 WP No. 50651 of 2019 amendment by incorporating additional facts about the claim of the defendant about title over the suit property in question which would enable the Court to decide the dispute in controversy. Therefore, the delay in filing the application would be compensated through cost and accordingly, allowed the application. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/plaintiff submits that the Court ought not to have allowed the application. It is submitted that what is the counterclaim, the pleadings are very vague and further, in the original written statement, the defendant has admitted the Sale Deed which is in favour of the plaintiff and now by virtue of the amended pleadings, the defendant is going to take away the said admission and the defendant is denying the Sale Deed in favour of the plaintiff. By way of the amendment, the plaintiff cannot come up with such pleadings and the defendant cannot be permitted to cover up the latches and to take away an admission which is in favour of the plaintiff. The trial Court without considering all these aspects had allowed the application. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4995 WP No. 50651 of 2019 5. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent/defendant submits that the trial Court had rightly considered the application. It is submitted that the trial has not commenced and the defendant had not taken any inconsistent stands. But in fact, he has placed before the Court some more facts in support of the stand taken by him. It is submitted that if the amendment is not allowed, it would cause lot of prejudice to the defendant and as rightly observed by the trial Court, the Court would be in a better position to decide the controversy between the parties. 6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/plaintiff and the learned Government Advocate for the respondent/defendant, perused the entire material on record. I.A.No.4 is filed by the defendant seeking amendment of the written statement. This Court has perused the original written statement and the amended pleadings whereby the defendant want to delete para No.13 and looking at both, it appears that as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defendant is not taking any contra stand and in fact, it is the case of the defendant right from the beginning that the property belongs to the Government and the Sale - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4995 WP No. 50651 of 2019 Deed of the plaintiff is a fictitious one and by way of this amendment, by adding para No.13, the defendant has elaborated the pleadings. 7. Considering the fact that the trial has not commenced and the trial Court had rightly considered all the aspects and had rightly allowed the application and this Court finds no reasons to interfere the order passed by the trial Court. Hence, this Court is passing the following order: ORDER i. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. ii. All I.As. in this writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41