- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15042 WP No. 108159 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO.108159 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. DURUGAMMA W/O LATE HANUMANTAPPA @ SANN HANUMANTAPPA, AGE. 66 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, 2. SHRI PARASHURAM S/O LATE SANNA HANUMANTAPPA, AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, 3. SHRI TIPPAYYA S/O LATE SANNA TIPPAYYA, AGE. 56 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, 4. SMT. NAGAMMA W/O LATE BASAPPA, AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK (1ST WIFE), ALL ARE R/O. MARABANAHALLI VILLAGE, TQ. KUDLIGI, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR-583 135. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKHAR NAGASHETTI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S.L. MATTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI GOPAYYANAVAR DODDACHITAPPA S/O LATE BADAPPA, AGE. 70 YEARS, Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15042 WP No. 108159 of 2025 OCC. AGRICULTURIST. 2. SHRI GOPAYYANAVAR SANNAPPA S/O LATE BADAPPA, AGE. 68 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, 3. SHRI GOPAYYANAVAR DODDA KAVALAPPA S/O LATE BADAPPA, AGE. 66 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST. 4. SHRI GOPAYYANAVAR SANNA KAVALAPPA S/O LATE BADAPPA, AGE. 64 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, 5. SHRI GOPAYYANAVAR SANNA CHITAPPA S/O LATE BADAPPA, AGE. 62 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, ALL ARE R/O. OF MARABANAHALLI VILLAGE, TQ. KUDLIGI, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR-583 135. 6. SMT. HAMPAMMA W/O LATE BASAPPA, AGE. 36 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK (2ND WIFE), … RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING AN ORDER PASSED DATED 22.09.2025 BY CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUDLIGI ON I.A. NO.3 FILED U/O 6 RULE 17 R/W 151 OF CPC IN O.S. NO.21/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-F IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15042 WP No. 108159 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) 1. This petition is filed assailing the order dated 22.09.2025 allowing the application seeking amendment of the plaint. 2. The application is opposed by the defendants. The Trial Court allowed the application and the impugned order reads as under: “C/p/f filed IA No.3 U/o 6 Rule 17 R/w Sec. 151 of CPC to amend the plaint. C/d/t p/t for objection to IA No.3. Heard, perused. In the interest of justice, IA No.3 is allowed on cost of Rs.200/-. Plaintiff is permitted to amend the plaint. For amendment and A/P and for hearing on IA No.2. Call on: 07.11.2025.” 3. On going through the said order, it is noticed that reasons are not assigned by the Trial Court and the application is allowed on payment of cost of Rs.200/-. 4. Learned counsel the petitioners would submit that amendment sought is relating to the cause of action - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15042 WP No. 108159 of 2025 to file a suit and that application is filed when the defendants filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to reject the plaint for want of cause of action. It is his submission that application for rejection of plaint is kept pending before the Court for more than a year and thereafter, this application is filed. 5. Though this Court is of the view that the order is not a speaking order and the order should have been passed by assigning the reasons. Instead of remanding the matter for the same purpose, this Court is of the view that the reasons can be supplemented. The Paragraph which is sought to be incorporated by way of an amendment reads as under; AMENDMENT SOUGHT FOR SCHEDULE “In the original plaint page No-5 after para No-9 added the cause of action para as para No.9(A) i.e. ¸ÀzÀj zÁªÉUÉ ªÁådå PÁgÀtªÀÅ JA.£ÀA-04/1990- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15042 WP No. 108159 of 2025 91 gÀAzÀÄ ªÀÄÄmÉõÀ£ï ªÀiÁr¹PÉÆAqÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ ºÁUÀÆ ¢£ÁAPÀ 14.12.2019 gÀAzÀÄ ªÀiÁ£Àå ¹«¯ï £ÁåAiÀiÁ¼ÀAiÀĪÀÅ DzÉñÀ ªÀiÁrzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ¢AzÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀiÁ£Àå ¸ÀºÁLPÀ DAiÀÄÄPÀÛgÀªÀgÀ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è C¦Ã®Ä £ÀA-152/2022-23 gÀ DzÉñÀ ªÀiÁrzÁV¤AzÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÁ¢AiÀÄ ¸Áé¢üãÀvÉUÉ CrØ¥Àr¹zÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ¢AzÀ GAmÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ¥ÀæwªÁ¢UÀ¼ÀÄ gÁdQÃAiÀÄ¢AzÀ ºÁUÀÆ DyðPÀªÁV vÀÄA§ §¯ÁqÀå«gÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ªÁ¢AiÀÄ£ÀÄß zÁªÁ D¹Û¬ÄAzÀ Nr¹ ¸ÀzÀj D¹ÛAiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÀ§½¸À¨ÉÃPÉA§ zÀÄgÀÄzÉÝñÀ ºÉÆA¢ ªÁ¢AiÀÄ ºÀPÀÄÌ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸Áé¢üãÀvÉUÉ vÉÆAzÀgÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ CrØAiÀÄ£ÀÄßAlÄ ªÀiÁrgÀÄvÁÛgÉ ºÁUÀÆ EA¢UÀÆ ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀ¢gÀÄvÀÛzÉ.” 6. The paragraph noticed above indicates the date on which the cause of action arose. The Court has also imposed a cost of Rs.200/-. Assuming that the application for amendment is rejected, that does not prevent the plaintiffs from withdrawing the suit and filing a fresh suit. 7. Under these circumstances, the order allowing the application for amendment of the plaint to incorporate the plea relating to the cause of action is upheld for the reasons assigned by this Court in the order. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15042 WP No. 108159 of 2025 8. The Trial Court shall consider the application for rejection of the plaint in case same is insisted by the defendants. 9. The narration of contentions in the plaint is disputed by defendants. Thus, the cause of action appears to be there to file the suit and the plaintiff should be allowed to plead it and prove it. 10. It is made clear that contention relating to cause of action has to be proved in trial. 11. With above observation, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE AM CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 33