- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42020 WP No. 7775 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 7775 OF 2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: PRINCE JOSEPH AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS SON OF JOSEPH V P NO.409/47 SY NO.47, ETTAKODI VILLAGE PINCODE - 563 160 LAKKUR HOBLI, MALUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT ALSO AT FLAT NO.17-D EXPRESS ESTATE KALOOR, COCHIN - 682 017 KERALA STATE. …PETITIONER (BY SRI GANESH BHAT Y.H, ADV.) AND: 1. VIJAYALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS D/O LATE B ANNAIAH REDDY WIFE OF LOKESH REDDY RESIDING AT NO.345 12TH CROSS, 1ST STAGE CMH ROAD, BENGALURU-560 038. 2. T.N. RAMACHANDRA SINCE DEAD, REPRESENTED BY LR I.E., R-3 V/O DATED 18.08.2025 3. SMT. T. BHAGYA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS D/O SRI T.N. RAMACHANDRA PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.9 Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42020 WP No. 7775 of 2021 4TH CROSS, 1ST FLOOR VINOBHA COLONY AVALAHALLI, GEF POST MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 026. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAMACHANDRA H.R, ADV., FOR SRI ANANTHA KRISHNA MURTHY, ADV., FOR R-1; SRI N. SRINIVAS, ADV, FOR R-3; V/O DT: 18.08.2025, R-3 SERVED ) THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN O.S.NO.108/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE HONBLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MALURSET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 01.04.2021 AT ANNEXURE-F ON I.A.NO.7 IN O.S.NO.108/2012 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE HONBLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MALUR AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the plaintiff with a prayer to set aside the order dated 01.04.2021 passed on IA No.VII in O.S. No.108 of 2012 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge Malur. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Petitioner herein has filed O.S.No.108 of 2012 before the Jurisdictional Civil Court at Malur seeking the relief of declaration of his title in respect of the suit schedule - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42020 WP No. 7775 of 2021 property and also to declare certain sale deeds executed in favour of defendant no.1. as null and void and for a consequential relief of permanent injunction. In the said suit, the contesting defendants have entered appearance and filed a detailed written statement. After the issues were framed by the trial Court on the basis of the rival pleadings of the parties, I.A.No.No.VII under Order VI Rule 17 r/w Section 151 of CPC was filed on behalf of the plaintiff seeking to incorporate proposed paragraph nos.9(a) and 9(b), immediately after paragraph no.9 of the plaint in O.S.No.108 of 2012. The contesting defendants had not filed any objection to the said application. However, the trial Court vide the order impugned has rejected the said application and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner / plaintiff is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in support of the prayer made in the petition submits that, the petitioner wants to bring on record certain facts which are subsequent to filing of O.S No.108 of 2012. He submits that petitioner and defendant no.1 in the present suit were parties in O.S.No.143 of 2001 and there are certain - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42020 WP No. 7775 of 2021 findings recorded in the said suit and the petitioner wanted to bring the same on record and accordingly had filed I.A.No.VII seeking to amend the plaint by incorporating proposed paragraph no.9(a) and 9(b) immediately after paragraph no.9. The trial Court has erroneously rejected the same. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the contesting respondents has argued in support of the impugned order and submits that trial Court has rejected the application for the reason that there is no necessity for amending the plaint and mere marking of certified copy of judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.108 of 2012 is sufficient. He accordingly, prays to dismiss the petition. 6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court have repeatedly held that the Court should be liberal while considering an amendment application, if the proposed amendment does not change the nature of the suit or does not cause any hardship to the other side. 7. In the present case, the plaintiff has filed an application seeking amendment of the plaint by incorporating - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42020 WP No. 7775 of 2021 paragraph no.9(a) and 9(b), after paragraph no.9 in the plaint. In the proposed amendment, plaintiff intends to bring on record the subsequent events that had taken place after filing of the suit. According to the plaintiff, in O.S.No.143 of 2001, in which the plaintiff and defendant no.1 in the present suit are parties, certain specific observations and findings are made which would be relevant for the purpose of disposal of the present suit. The amendment application was not even opposed by the defendants by filing objection. 8. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that the statement made in proposed paragraph number 9(a) and 9(b) are undisputed. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the trial Court was not justified in dismissing I.A.No.VII filed by the plaintiff. 9. Accordingly the following ORDER (i) Writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 01.04.2021 passed on IA No.VII in O.S. No.108 of 2012 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge Malur is set aside - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42020 WP No. 7775 of 2021 and consequently the prayer made in I.A.No.VII is allowed. (iii) Since the suit is of the year 2012, efforts shall be made by the trial Court to dispose of the suit on its merits as expeditiously as possible. Pending application if any does not survive for consideration and are disposed of. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE NMS