- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44442 WP No. 7916 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 7916 OF 2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: MR. ANJANAPPA, S/O HANUMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, NO. 3/16, 6TH MAIN ROAD, RING ROAD SERVICE ROAD, 4TH BLOCK, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 096. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SAMARTH PRAKASH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SUGADA BAI, W/O LATE NARAYAN RAO, AGED MAJOR. 2. MR. N GIRISH @ GOPAL, S/O LATE NARAYAN RAO, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. BOTH SL.NO. 1 AND 2 R/AT NO.17, 6TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK, NANDINI LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 096. 3. THE COMMISSIONER, BRUHAT BENGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, CORPORATION CIRCLE, N R SQUARE, BENGALURU-560 002. Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44442 WP No. 7916 of 2021 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, WARD NO 43, MAHALAKSHMI PURAM, SUB DIVISION, BANGALORE - 560 096. 5. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTIOR OF TOWN PLANNING (WEST), BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, K R CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B SATEESH, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2; V/O DATED 20.04.2021 NOTICE TO R-3 TO R-5 IS D/W) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 01.04.2021 PASSED BY THE XXXIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH 40) AT BANGALORE IN O.S.NO.8659/2014 (ANNEXURE-A) AND DIRECT THE TRIAL COURT TO ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER ORDER VI RULE 17 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908 (INTERIM APPLICATION NO.14) AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS AS ARE JUST. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, 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.14 filed under Order VI Rule - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44442 WP No. 7916 of 2021 17 read with Section 151 of CPC in OS No.8659/2014 by the Court of XXXIX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Suit in OS No.8659/2014 was filed by the petitioner herein seeking the relief of mandatory injunction against the defendants in respect of the suit schedule B property. Contesting defendants had opposed the prayer made in the suit by filing written statement. IA No.14 under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC was filed on behalf of the plaintiff to amend the prayer column in the plaint in OS No.8659/2014. The said application was opposed by the contesting defendants by filing the objections. The Trial Court vide the order impugned has rejected the said application. 4. Suit in OS No.8659/2014 is filed by the petitioner seeking the relief of mandatory injunction directing the defendants, his legal heirs or anybody claiming under him from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule B property. The proposed amendment in IA No.14 is to permit the plaintiff to insert the word 'permanent' before the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44442 WP No. 7916 of 2021 words 'mandatory injunction' in prayer (a) and also replace the word 'directing' by the word 'restraining' in prayer (a) found in the plaint in OS No.8659/2014. The said prayer do not either change the nature of the suit or the cause of action and on the other hand, the amendment sought is to clarify the prayer made in the suit. In the objections filed to the said application, it is contented that application is filed to drag the proceedings in a suit which is at the stage of arguments. It is not contended in the objections that defendants will be put to hardship in any manner if the proposed amendment is allowed. What is sought to be pleaded is that defendants will be put to inconvenience if the proposed amendment which is filed at a belated stage is allowed. It is trite that Courts are required to be liberal while considering applications for amendment of pleadings and the said approach is required to avoid multiplicity of litigation. Inconvenience caused to the other side can be compensated monetarily and therefore, I am of the opinion that the Trial Court was not justified in rejecting IA No.14. Accordingly, following order:- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44442 WP No. 7916 of 2021 5. The writ petition is allowed. The order impugned dated 01.04.2021 passed on IA No.14 filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC in OS No.8659/2014 by the Court of XXXIX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is hereby set-aside. Consequently, IA No.14 is allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/-. The cost imposed shall be paid by the plaintiff to the defendants before the Trial Court on the next date of hearing. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE DN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36