- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:442 WP No. 148766 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 148766 OF 2020 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. SIDRAM MARUTI YADAGUDE AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 2. SRI.BASAPPA MARUTI YADAGUDE AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 3. SRI.RAJU MARUTI YADAGUDE AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, No.1 to 3 ARE R/O NAGARMUNNOLI, TQ CHIKKODI,DIST BELAGAVI. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAMACHANDRA A MALI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. BHIMAPPA IRAPPA YADAGUDE AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, 2. SMT. AVAKKA W/O IRAPPA YADAGUDE AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O NAGARMUNNOLI, TQ CHIKKODI, DIST BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VITTHAL S TELI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:442 WP No. 148766 of 2020 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN O.S.NO.242/2013 ON THE FILE OF PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CHIKODI, AND ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DTD. 22.10.2020 MADE ON I.A.NO.III IN O.S.NO.242/2013 PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CHIKODI PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE.G, AS THE SAME BEING ARBITRARY, ERRONEOUS AND ILLEGAL AND NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRL. HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) This writ petition is filed challenging the order on I.A.III dated 22.10.2020 passed in O.S. No.242/2013 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Chikodi. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows under: The respondents/plaintiffs filed a suit in O.S. No.242/2013 for partition and separate possession. The petitioners/defendants filed a written statement. The trial Court framed the issues. When the matter was posted for recording the evidence, the plaintiffs filed an application in I.A. III for amendment to the plaint. The said application was opposed by the defendants by filing their objections. The trial Court vide order dated 22.10.2020 allowed I.A.III and - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:442 WP No. 148766 of 2020 permitted the plaintiffs to amend the plaint as prayed for and the defendants aggrieved by the order on I.A. III filed this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants and the learned counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the trial Court has not assigned any reasons, while passing the impugned order. He submits that, the impugned order passed by the trial Court is cryptic and non speaking order. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ petition. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs supports the impugned order and submits that, the trial Court has assigned the reasons while passing the impugned order. Hence, on this ground, he prays to dismiss the writ petition. 6. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 7. It is not in dispute that, the respondents filed a suit for partition and separate possession against the petitioners. The petitioners filed a written statement. When the case was posted for the respondents/plaintiffs’ evidence, they filed an application in I.A.III seeking amendment to the plaint. The petitioners/defendants raised several contentions in the objections. The trial Court has not - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:442 WP No. 148766 of 2020 considered the contentions, raised by the petitioners in the objections. 8. From the perusal of the impugned order, it discloses that, the trial Court has not assigned any reasons, while passing the impugned order. The impugned order passed by the trial Court is without any basis. Hence, on this ground alone, itself, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 9. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following. ORDER The writ petition is allowed. Order on I.A. III dated 22.10.2020 passed by the learned Principal Senior civil Judge, Chikodi, in O.S. No.242/2013 is set aside. The trial Court is directed to re-consider I.A. III afresh and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. All the contentions of the parties are kept open. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE kmv CT: BSB