- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10700 WP No. 50581 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 50581 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI SHANKAR REDDY S/O LATE. MUNIYAPPA REDDY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT AGARA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK - 520 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. G R LAKSHMIPATHY REDDY.,ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. N NARAYANA S/O NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/AT NO 23, 14TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. H.N. BASAVARAJU.,ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN O.S.NO.1694/1981, ON THE FILE OF XVII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE (CCH-16), QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 09.10.2019 ON I.A.NO.16, IN O.S.NO.1694/1981 ON THE FILE OF XVII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDE, BANGLORE (CCH-16) (ANNEXURE-G) AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10700 WP No. 50581 of 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Plaintiff in a suit in O.S.No.1694/1981, on the file of XVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court') which is pending consideration for over 44 years, is before this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 09.10.2019 passed by the Trial Court, by which an application filed by the defendant under Order 6 Rule 17 has been allowed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the memorandum of petition and documents annexed therewith submits that the amendment sought for by the defendant is only for the purpose of bringing on record the fact with regard to filing of suit in O.S.No.2273/1998 by the plaintiff, which was dismissed and filing of Regular First Appeal in RFA. No.948/2001 by the plaintiff which was also dismissed and with regard to filing of Special Leave Petition in S.L.P.No.20046-48/2008 which was also dismissed. He submits these are the facts which are available on record and need not be pleaded by the defendant by way of amendment to the written statement . He further submits that said application - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10700 WP No. 50581 of 2019 for amendment is filed at a highly belated stage. Hence, seeks for allowing of the petition. 3. Though it is very unfortunate that a suit for bare injunction is pending consideration for the past 44 years, except the blame game by one another, nothing is being said on a question for the reason for their inordinate delay. However fact remains the plaintiff/petitioner herein after having filed the present suit in O.S.No.1694/1981, for the relief of bare injunction, had subsequently filed a suit for comprehensive relief in O.S.No.2273/1998 plaint of which is admittedly rejected under Order 7 Rule 11, challenge to the same made by the plaintiff/petitioner herein by filing Regular First Appeal in RFA. No.948/2001, resulted in dismissal. Further challenge made in Special Leave Petition in S.L.P.No.20046-48/2008 has also resulted in dismissal. It is these facts of the matter, which the respondent/defendant sought to bring on record. 4. As submitted by the counsel for the plaintiff/petitioner herein, the subsequent events pertaining to aforesaid proceedings between the same parties could have been brought to the notice of the Court even without the amendment. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10700 WP No. 50581 of 2019 Nonetheless, brining the same on record by way of a pleading in the written statement would neither cause prejudice to the plaintiff/petitioner herein nor would change the nature of the suit, inasmuch as the same of the judicial proceedings initiated and prosecuted by none other than the plaintiff/petitioner. 5. In that view of the matter, no irregularities or illegalities can be found in the order passed by the Trial Court. Accordingly, petition is disposed of. 6. Considering the inexplicable period of time at which this matter is pending consideration, this Court only hopes that the Trial Court would take up the matter on day to day basis and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15