YALLAPPA S/O CHANNABASAPPA MELINAMANI v. BASAVARAJ S/O CHANDRAKANT TALLURMATH
WP/106372/2024 · 2025-11-05
Anant Ramanath Hegde
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 59098 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 59098 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15110 WP No. 106372 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 106372 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
YALLAPPA S/O CHANNABASAPPA MELINAMANI, AGE. 59 YEARS, OCC. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE, R/O. “KAMADHENU”, PLOT NO.35/1, NARAYANPUR, 2ND MAIN, 4TH CROSS ROAD, SADHANAKERI, 1ST CROSS, DHARWAD-580 008. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHETAN LIMBIKAI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. BASAVARAJ S/O CHANDRAKANT TALLURMATH, AGE. 44 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE WORK, R/O. HOUSE NO.354, DODDANAYAKANAKOPPA, SADHANAKERI, DHARWAD-580 008. 2. RAVINDRA S/O CHANDRAKANT TALLURMATH, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE WORK, R/O: HOUSE NO.354, DODDANAYAKANAKOPPA, SADHANAKERI, DHARWAD-580 008. 3. JYOTI D/O CHANDRAKANT TALLURMATH, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: HOUSE NO.354, DODDANAYAKANAKOPPA, SADHANAKERI, DHARWAD-580 008. 4. CHANDRAKANT S/O RUDRAYYA TALLURMATH, AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. NAGALAVI, TQ/DIST: DHARWAD-580 007. 5. DRAKSHAYINI W/O CHANDRAKANT TALLURMATH, AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. HOUSE NO.354, DODDANAYAKANAKOPPA,
Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15110 WP No. 106372 of 2024
SADHANAKERI, DHARWAD-580 008. KASHAVVA @ SHANTA RUDRAYYA TALLURMATH, SINCE DEAD BY HER LR’S.,
6. RAJU S/O BASAYYA KALLIMATH, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE, R/O. C/O: VASTRAD, VINAYAK NAGAR, DHARWAD-580 009. 7. GIRIJA W/O NAGAYYA MATHAPATI, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: SURAKOD VILLAGE, TQ: NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG-582 207. 8. ARAVAIND S/O PANDURANG CHAVALAR, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O: ’NAMMA MANE’ APARTMENT, VIDYA NAGAR, HUBBALLI, DHARWAD-580 021. 9. PUSHPA W/O ANAND CHAVALAR, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O: ’NAMMA MANE’ APARTMENT, VIDYA NAGAR, HUBBALLI, DHARWAD-580 021. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ROHIT S. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3;
NOTICE TO R4 TO R9 ARE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR DIRECTION OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO SET-ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 01/10/2024 PASSED BY THE 3RD ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM DHARWAD, IN O.S. NO.57/2023 ON I.A. NO.16 FILED BY THE PETITIONER/DEFENDANT NO.5 UNDER ORDER VI RULE 17 R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ALLOW THE I.A.
NO.16 DATED 23/09/2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15110 WP No. 106372 of 2024
ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The petition is filed assailing the order dated 01.10.2024 passed in O.S.No.57/2023 on I.A.No.16, dismissing the application filed by defendant No.5 seeking amendment of his written statement. 3. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the written statement filed by defendant No.5 is not yet accepted by the Trial Court. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is deemed to have been accepted as issues are framed incorporating the defence raised by defendant No.5. 5. Issue No.6 reads as under:
“Whether defendant No.5 proves that suit of the plaintiffs is hit by res-judicata?”
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15110 WP No. 106372 of 2024
6. However, it is fairly submitted that there is no formal order accepting the application of defendant No.5 seeking to file written statement beyond 90 days. 7. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the view that the application for amendment of the written statement of defendant No.5 could not have been considered on merit. The Trial Court should have passed an order on the application filed by defendant No.5 to file written statement beyond the stipulated period. 8. Hence, the following: i. Writ petition is allowed. ii. Impugned order dated 01.10.2024 is set aside without entering into the merits. iii. The Trial Court shall consider the application filed by defendant No.5 seeking leave of the Court to file written statement and if it is accepted, then shall consider the application for amendment of written statement. - 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15110 WP No. 106372 of 2024
iv. It is made clear that nothing is expressed on the merits of the matter. v. All contentions kept open. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE
CLK CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 52