- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6952 WP No. 102395 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.102395 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. SHARANAPPAGOUDA S/O. BHIMANAGOUDA BELAKI, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BENAKANADONI, TQ: HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOTE. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANTOSHKUMAR G.RAMPUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. BASAMMA W/O. VENKANAGOUDA JADIYAPPAGOUDA, AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE MAKER, R/O. BENAKANADONI, TQ: HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOTE. 2. SRI. SHANKRAPPA S/O. BASALINGAPPA METI, AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. HALLUR, TQ: BAGALKOTE, DIST: BAGALKOTE. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRANAV BADAGI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S.B.HEBBALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED) 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 QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18-4-2022 IN O.S. NO.35/2006 C/W OS NO.31/2006 PASSED BY THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HUNGUND AT ANNEXURE-H AND ETC. Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.05.02 13:12:54 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6952 WP No. 102395 of 2022 THIS WIRT PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by plaintiff in O.S.No.31/2004 assailing the order passed on I.A.No.18. 2. It is quite strange to note that the learned Judge having rejected the application in I.A.No.17 has erred in allowing I.A.No.18 and permitting the petitioner in the connected writ petition (W.P.No.115270/2019) to amend the plaint. 3. This Court having permitted the petitioner in W.P.No.115270/2019 to substantiate as to what was bequeathed by way of testamentary arrangement is the property bearing Sy.Nos.326/1 and not 326/2, this Court is of the view that the learned Judge has erred in allowing I.A.No.18. 4. On closer examination of the prayer sought for in I.A.No.18, which is filed in O.S.No.35/2006, the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6952 WP No. 102395 of 2022 petitioner in W.P.No.115270/2019 has cleverly sought rectification of the survey number in the instrument and not in the plaint. This Court deems it fit to take cognizance of the prayer sought in the proposed amendment application filed in O.S.No.35/2006 and the same is extracted, which reads as under: "For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit of the applicant, the Hon’ble court be please to allow the applicant to amend the plaint by inserting another column as 5(a) as “ªÀÄÈvÀÄå ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è PÀgÀr UÁæªÀÄzÀ j.¸À.£ÀA.326/2 CAvÁ £ÀdgÀ ZÀÄQ¤AzÀ vÀ¥ÀÄà mÉÊ¥ï DVzÀÄÝ CzÀÄ 326/1 CAvÁ ªÀÄÈvÀÄå ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è ¸É๦üPÀ jð¥sï DPÀÖ PÁAiÉÄÝ, ¸ÉPÀëöå£ï 26 gÀ ¥ÀæPÁgÀ 326/1 CAvÁ wzÀÄÝ ¥ÀqÉ ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä ºÀÄPÀÄA ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÀÄ.” As well as in the prayer column also insurt the new para as A(i) “ªÀÄÈvÀÄå ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è PÀgÀr UÁæªÀÄzÀ j.¸À.£ÀA.326/1 CAvÁ £ÀdgÀ ZÀÄQ¤AzÀ vÀ¥ÀÄà mÉÊ¥ï DVzÀÄÝ CzÀÄ 326/1 CAvÁ ªÀÄÈvÀÄå ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è ¸É๦üPÀ jð¥sï DPÀÖ PÁAiÉÄÝ, ¸ÉPÀëöå£ï 26 gÀ ¥ÀæPÁgÀ 326/1 CAvÁ wzÀÄÝ ¥ÀqÉ ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä ºÀÄPÀÄA ªÀiÁqÀ¨ÉÃPÀÄ.” By inserting this new paras no harm or loss will be caused to the defendants, if the amendment is not carried an irreparable loss will be caused to the plaintiff. The mistake in the instrument as R.S.No.326/2 be deleted and insert 326/1 by amendment of the instrument." - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6952 WP No. 102395 of 2022 5. In the present case, the impugned order passed by the learned Trial Judge on I.A.No.18 is clearly in contradiction to the earlier reasoned order passed on I.A.No.17 in O.S.No.31/2006. By virtue of the order in I.A.No.17, the learned Judge had categorically declined the amendment sought by the respondent/plaintiff to alter the survey number mentioned in the Will, having found such amendment to be impermissible at that stage of the proceedings. However, through the subsequent order on I.A.No.18, the very same respondent/plaintiff has been virtually permitted to achieve indirectly what was expressly disallowed directly, thereby defeating the substance of the earlier judicial determination. The order on I.A.No.18, in effect, allows the respondent to amend or reinterpret the survey number reflected in the Will, which had already been the subject matter of adjudication under I.A.No.17. This not only amounts to judicial inconsistency but also violates the principle of finality and coherence in interlocutory orders. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6952 WP No. 102395 of 2022 Moreover, this Court, while disposing of W.P.No.115270/2019, had specifically reserved liberty to the respondent to lead evidence to establish that what was intended to be bequeathed was Survey No.326/1 and not Survey No.326/2, without granting any liberty to amend the Will or its contents. The impugned order on I.A.No.18 thus suffers from serious perversity and procedural impropriety, warranting its interference and setting aside by this Hon'ble Court. 6. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pas the following: ORDER (i) Writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order is set side. (iii) However, this order will not come in the way of the respondent in taking benefit of the observations made by this Court in the connected W.P.No.115270/2019. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB/-. Ct:vh. List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11