- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29047 WP No. 25750 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 25750 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. S.NAGARAJ S/O SUBBARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O MANDIKAL VILLAGE, MANDIKAL HOBLI, CHIKBALLAPUR TALUK - 562 101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GANGADHAR., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. HARISH KUMAR.M.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF SECRETARY, STATE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 01. 2. THE SECRETARY OF REVENUE DEPARTMENT, STATE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 01. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT, CHICKBALLAPUR-562 101. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SUB-DIVISION, CHICKBALLAPUR TALUK, CHICKBALLAPUR - 562 101. Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29047 WP No. 25750 of 2022 5. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, CHICKBALLAPUR - 562 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NEELAKANTAPPA.K.PUJAR., HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Gangadhar., counsel on behalf of Sri.Harish Kumar.M.S., for the petitioner and Sri.Neelakantappa K.Pujar., HCGP for the respondents have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated 09.09.2022 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Gudibande on I.A.No.5 in O.S.No.313/2020 vide Annexure-E on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29047 WP No. 25750 of 2022 4. The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendants for declaration, permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable property. The said suit is being contested by the defendants. Prior to the commencement of trial, the petitioner filed an application seeking amendment of the plaint by incorporating additional prayer and corresponding pleadings. The application was opposed by the defendants. The Trial Court rejected the application. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. The rejection of the application is contrary to the well- settled principles of law laid down by the Apex Court in the following judgments: I. SAMPATH KUMAR VS. AYYAKANNU AND ANOTHER REPORTED IN AIR 2002 SCC 3369. II. M/S. REVAJEETU BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS VS. M/S.NARAYANASWAMY & SONS AND OTHERS REPORTED IN (2009)10 SCC 848. III. L.C.HANUMANTHAPPA VS. H.B. SHIVAKUMAR REPORTED IN (2016) 1 SCC 332. IV. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION VS. SANJEEV BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED REPORTED IN AIR 2022 SC 4256. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29047 WP No. 25750 of 2022 V. RAJESH KUMAR AGGARWAL AND OTHERS VS. K.K.MODI & OTHERS REPORTED IN AIR 2006 SC 1647. 4. As can be seen from the aforesaid judgments, in the event that an amendment was opposed on the ground of limitation, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the proposed amendment shall not relate back to the date of the suit but shall be reckoned/considered on the date of the application and the questions/issues regarding limitation would have to be kept open to be decided by the Trial Court at the time of final disposal of the suit. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order passed by the Trial Court deserves to be set aside and I.A.No.5 deserves to be allowed subject to certain conditions. 5. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (a) The petition is hereby allowed. (b) The impugned order is hereby set aside. I.A.No.5 stands allowed subject to the condition that the proposed amendment shall not relate - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29047 WP No. 25750 of 2022 back to the date of the suit but shall be reckoned/considered from the date of the application, which was filed on 16.04.2022. (c) Liberty is reserved in favor of the respondents/defendants to file additional written statements to the amended plaint and take up all defenses, including the defense of limitation. (d) All rival contentions on all aspects excluding limitation etc., are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47