- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13989 WP No. 105476 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 105476 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. BASAMMA W/O. SRIRAM ILIGER AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/AT. NAVALI, TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL. 2. SRI. GIRISH S/O. BALAPPA GANGAVATHI AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER AND AGRI., R/AT. SARADAR GALLI, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MRUTYUNJAY TATA BANGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. BALLAPPA S/O. KODANDAPPA GANGAVATHI, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT. SARADAR GALLI, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 2. SMT. SHOBHA W/O. ANJANEPPA GUTHEDAT, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/AT. BASAVAN BAGEVADI, TQ: BASAVAN BAGEWADI, DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586101. 3. SMT. SHAILAJA W/O. BASAVARAJ ILIGER, CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.10.18 07:57:10 +0100 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13989 WP No. 105476 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/AT. SIGALI VILLAGE, TQ: SHIRAHATTI, DIST: GADAG-582102. 4. SMT. POORNIMA W/O. SHANKAR ILIGER, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/AT. BALUTAGI VILLAGE, TQ: MANVI, DIST: RAICHUR-584101. 5. SMT. SHARADA W/O. CHITRASHEKHAR MALAGANNAVAR, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/AT. ALNAVAR VILLAGE, TQ: ALNAVAR, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA-581301. 6. SMT. BHARATI W/O. SHANMUKAPPA UNKI, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/AT. BHAGYANAGAR, KOPPAL, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 7. SRI. SHANMUKHAPPA S/O. IRAPPA UNKI, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT. BHAGYANAGAR, KOPPAL, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 8. SMT. LATA W/O. VEERAPPA KEMBHAVI, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/AT. BHAGYANAGAR, KOPPAL, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 9. SRI. SUBHAS S/O. VEERAPPA KEMBHAVI, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13989 WP No. 105476 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT. BHAGYANAGAR, KOPPAL, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 10. SRI. E RAJENDRAGOUDA S/O. E GOVINDAGOUDA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT. AMINPUR VILLAGE, KOPPAL, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 11. SRI. SHARANAPPA S/O. NAGAPPA SAJJAN, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT. MADNUR VILLAGE, KOPPAL, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 12. SMT. ANSUYA W/O. SHARANBASAVARAJ INCHAL, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT. GAVEESHRI NAGAR, KOPPAL, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL-583231. 13. SMT. GEETA W/O. MAHANTESH PATIL, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT. J H PATEL NAGAR, KOPPAL, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL. 14. SRI. MAHANTESHGOUDA S/O. BASANGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT. J H PATEL NAGAR, KOPPAL, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL-583231. …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO R2, R3, R8 AND R10 ARE DISPENSED WITH; NOTICE TO R1, R4, R5, R6, R7, R9, R11 TO R14 ARE SERVED) - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13989 WP No. 105476 of 2025 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 ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR DIRECTION AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED PORTION OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM KOPPAL, IN I.A.NO.24 DATED 19.07.2025 IN O.S.NO.51 OF 2018 AS PER ANNEXURE-D AND ALLOW I.A.NO.24 OF 2025 SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO HOLDING THE AMENDMENT WOULD NOT RELATE BACK BY ALLOWING PRESENT PETITION AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Notice to respondents No.2, 3, 8 and 10 is dispensed with as they have not contested the application seeking amendment of the plaint. 2. This petition is filed assailing the order permitting the amendment of the plaint. 3. In terms of the impugned order, certain typographical errors crept in the plaint were ordered to be amended. In addition to that, a prayer is also incorporated in the plaint challenging the sale deed executed by the defendant No.1 in favour of the defendants No.10 and 12. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13989 WP No. 105476 of 2025 4. Admittedly, the plaintiff is not a party to the sale deed. The Trial Court has held that the amendment will be effective from the date of the application not from the date of plaint. 5. It is noticed that there was no objection by the defendants to the said application. Even before this Court respondents have not entered appearance. 6. Learned counsel for petitioners would submit that no reasons are assigned as to why the amendment should take effect from the date of order and not from the date of the original pleading. 7. It is well settled principle of law whenever there is an amendment it will relate back to the date of original pleading. The Court in appropriate cases for the reasons to be assigned can make it to be operative from the date of the order. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13989 WP No. 105476 of 2025 8. As can be noticed from the impugned order, no reasons are assigned. Apart from that, it is also noticed that the plaintiff is not a party to the sale deed which is now sought to be challenged in terms of the amended prayer. 9. It is also noticed that the facts which necessiate such a prayer in the form of declaration are also there before the application for amendment was filed. 10. Under these circumstances, the Writ Petition is allowed. The amendment shall take effect from the date of original plaint. 11. The respondents are permitted to file additional written statement to the amended plaint. 12. Nothing is expressed on the merits of the claim of either of the parties. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE NAA Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15