- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38216 RP No. 301 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD REVIEW PETITION NO. 301 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SURESH S/O MANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS 2. SRI. MANJEGOWDA S/O NANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT GOLLARAHOSALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 116 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. G. R. VENKATESH MURTHY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SANNAMMA SINCE DEAD BY HER LR’S VISWANATH S/O LATE GOVINDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 2. SRI UMESH S/O LATE GOVINDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS 3. SRI PRABHAKARA S/O LATE GOVINDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38216 RP No. 301 of 2025 4. SRI PURUSHOTHAMMA S/O LATE GOVINDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 5. SMT JAYAMMA D/O LATE GOVINDEGOWDA W/O RANGE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 6. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA D/O LATE GOVIND GOWDA W/O SHIVANANJE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 7. SMT. KAMALAMMA D/O LATE GOVINDEGOWDA W/O LATE VENKATEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT GOLLARAHOSAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 116. …RESPONDENTS THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC. 114 R/W ORDER XLVII RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE REVIEW PETITION BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 04.03.2025 IN W.P.NO.24101/2024 AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38216 RP No. 301 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER 1. This review petition is filed seeking for review of the order dated 04.03.2025 passed in W.P.No.24101/2024. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Court in 2022 (1) AKR 564 in the case of Jayalakshmamma v. Lakkamma Thru L.Rs. and submitted that the suit for declaration and injunction has been filed and the application filed by the plaintiff for amendment at a later stage seeking relief of possession, cannot be allowed. 3. In the case referred by the petitioner, at the time of filing the suit, the plaintiff had knowledge that defendant is claiming to purchase the property under registered sale deed and also to be in possession of the same. Therefore, the Court has held that the amendment for possession cannot be allowed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38216 RP No. 301 of 2025 4. In the guise of review petition, the matter cannot be reheard on merits. On going through the order under review, it does not suffer from any legal infirmity or error apparent on the face of the records. Hence, the review petition is dismissed. 5. All the legal contentions of the parties are left open to raise in the suit, if law permits. 6. All pending applications, if any, are disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE HA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29