- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2788 WP No. 103147 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 103147 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. ARABANNA RAMAPPA NAIK AGE. 56 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TUKKANATTI - 591224 TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. C.S. SHETTAR, ADV) AND: 1. RAMAPPA GANGAPPA AGNEPPAGOL AGE. 49 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TUKKANATTI - 591224 TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI. 2. BHIMAPPA GANGAPPA AGNEPPAGOL AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TUKKANATTI - 591224 TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI. 3. DUNDAPPA GANGAPPA AGNEPPAGOL AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TUKKANATTI - 591224 TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI. 4. SHIVANING GANGAPPA AGNEPPAGOL AGE. 41 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TUKKANATTI - 591224 TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI. 5. BHIMAPPA APPAYYA GADADI MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.02.21 12:39:57 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2788 WP No. 103147 of 2022 AGE. 71 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TUKKANATTI - 591224 TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI. 6. UDDAPPA LAGAMAPPA HUNCHYAL AGE. 66 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TUKKANATTI - 591224 TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI. 7. YALLAPPA DODDA-YALLAPPA GADADI AGE. 61 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TUKKANATTI - 591224 TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI. 8. YALLAPPA RAMAPPA MARADI AGE. 65 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TUKKANATTI - 591224 TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI. 9. MUDAKAPPA DODDA-YALLAPPA CHIPPALKATTI, AGE. 63 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. TUKKANATTI - 591224 TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AKSHAY MALAWALE AND SRI. MAHESH WODEYAR, ADVS FOR R1 TO R9) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT GOKAK IN O.S.NO.747/2011 ON I.A.NO.VI DATED 02- 08-2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND THEREBY DISMISS THE APPLICATION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRL. HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2788 WP No. 103147 of 2022 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 by the plaintiff/petitioner, challenging the order on I.A.VI dated 02.08.2022 passed in O.S. No.747/2011 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Gokak. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows : The petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction in O.S. No.747/2011 on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Gokak. In the said suit, the respondents filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 dated 14.01.2022 to amend the written statement. The said application was opposed by the petitioner by filing objections on 17.06.2022. The trial Court allowed the application and permitted the defendants to carry out the amendment vide order dated 02.08.2022. Hence, this writ petition. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2788 WP No. 103147 of 2022 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned counsel for the respondents. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the respondents filed an application for amendment of the written statement, after commencement of the trial and also submits that the said application was filed after 8 years from the date of filing of the written statement. Hence, the trial Court could have rejected the application, but, on the contrary, allowed the application. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ petition. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents have filed an application for amendment of the written statement, only to change the survey number. The proposed amendment does not change the defence of the respondents. He submits that the trial Court was justified in passing the impugned order. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the writ petition. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2788 WP No. 103147 of 2022 6. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction and the respondents filed the written statement. The trial Court framed the issues, recorded the evidence of petitioner and thereafter, when the case was posted for arguments, the respondents filed an application for amendment of the written statement. 8. I have perused the proposed amendment of the written statement. It discloses that, there is a typographical error regarding the survey number in the written statement. The respondents, to rectify the said typographical mistake, have filed an application for amendment of the written statement. The proposed amendment does not change the defence of the respondents. The trial Court was justified in passing the impugned order. Hence, I do not find any error in the impugned order. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2788 WP No. 103147 of 2022 Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file replication to the written statement. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE kmv CT: BSB