- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1782 WP No. 100625 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 100625 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: M/S. FUTURE BATTERIES PROPRIETOR MRS. AKSHATA VENKATESH PAPPU, NO.3, K.A.KALBURGI COMPLEX, CLUB ROAD, HUBBALLI-580020, R/BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, VENKATESH S/O. RAGHAVENDRA PAPPU, AGE. 47 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. H.NO.3, K.A.KALBURGI COMPLEX ROAD, HUBBALLI-580020. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SACHIN C.ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE BANK OF INDIA (SBM) SMECC, ZONAL OFFICE, KESHWARPUR, HUBLI, R/BY THE DEPUTY MANAGER, SHRI. MAHADEV S/O. KALLAPPA ALLITTI, AGE. 50 YEARS, OCC. EMPLOYEE AT SBI. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.L.PATIL, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR QUASH OR PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER AND SET ASIDE OR IMPUGNED ORDER ON I.A. NO.7, DATED 25/09/2024 IN BEARING CASE NO. COM. O.S. 5089/2022 FILE PENDING BEFORE THE 5TH ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE DHARWAD SITTING AT HUBBALLI, THE COPY OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER AT ANNEXURE-G AND ETC. GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.02.01 15:28:19 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1782 WP No. 100625 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. Sri. K. L. Patil, learned counsel, accepts notice for the respondent No.1. 2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a) Issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or quash or pass appropriate order and set aside or impugned order on I.A. No.7, dated 25/09/2024 in bearing case no. Com. O.S. 5089/2022 file Pending before the 5th Addl. District and Session Judge Dharwad sitting at Hubballi, the copy of the impugned order at Annexure-G. b) It is further prayed that, issue a writ in the nature of mandamus and allow the I.A. 7 filed by the petitioner/Defendant filed under order VI Rule 17 R/w. section 151 of CPC in bearing case No. Com O.S. No. 5089/2022 filed pending before the 5th Addl. District and Session Judge, Dharwad sitting at Hubballi The copy of I.A. no. 7 produced at Annexure-E. c) Pass such other order as deems fit including cost. 3. A suit in Commercial O.S.No.5089/2022 has been filed by the respondent bank against the petitioner for recovery of ₹4,26,872/- along with interest. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1782 WP No. 100625 of 2025 Written statement having been filed, the defendant had categorically taken a contention that the plaintiff has intentionally tried to mislead the Court by narrating false stories about the loan availed by the defendant, as also that loan disbursed was not sufficient. 4. The issues having been framed, evidence having been lead when the matter having been posted for final arguments, the petitioner filed an application in I.A.No.7 under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the CPC for amendment of the written statement on 02/04/2024. 5. By way of the said amendment, defendant wanted to introduce prayer para 1(a) in the written statement to contend that the defendant has not taken any loan from the respondent bank and when the loan itself is not availed by the plaintiff, bank has no right to file the suit and the documents relied upon by the plaintiff are all concocted documents. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1782 WP No. 100625 of 2025 6. The said application having been objected to, came to be dismissed by the Trial Court on the ground that amendment sought for is a post-trial amendment and amounts to withdrawal of the admission made by the plaintiff, and as such, the same cannot be allowed. It is challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has not taken any loan and as such, the suit filed is without any basis. This averment could not be made in the written statement and the same having come to the knowledge of the petitioner when the matter was posted for arguments, the application is filed. 8. Heard Sri. Sachin C. Angadi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. K. L. Patil, learned counsel for respondent No.1. Perused the papers. 9. In the written statement filed originally the petitioner has categorically stated that there is a false story - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1782 WP No. 100625 of 2025 made by the petitioner. The loan amount has not been granted as per the requirement of the loan sanction and loan was not sanctioned for the business. As such, the defendant was forced to avail loan from the private financer due to which huge loss has been caused. It is further stated in the written statement that the defendant if granted some time for repayment of the amount by way of easy instalments it would be paid and that defendant was ready to avail of one time settlement. 10. Such being the pleadings filed in the written statement, the pleadings now sought to be inserted by way of amendment is as if loan has not been taken which is contradictory to the earlier pleading as also amounts to withdrawal of the admission by way of such contradiction. 11. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the Trial Court has rightly rejected the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1782 WP No. 100625 of 2025 application. No fault could be found with the order of the Trial Court. 12. No grounds being made out, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE gab CT-MCK List No.: 3 Sl No.: 3