- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14902 WP No. 101611 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 101611 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: ASHOK S/O VITHALASA KATHARE, AGE. 74 YEARS, R/O. MOORSAVIRMATH COMPOUND, KAMARIPETH, HUBBALLI, REPRESENTED BY HIS SPL. P.A. HOLDER, SRI. ANIL KATHARE. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.N. YARAGUPPI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY ITS D.C., DHARWAD. 2. KARNATAKA ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND SPL. LAO BRTS COMPANY LTD., OFFICE AT: KSFC BUILDING, RAYAPUR, DHARWAD-580 009. 3. PRAKASH S/O TIPPANNA DASANUR, AGE. 49 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, 4. ULAVAPPA S/O TIPPANNA DASANUR, AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, 5. RAVIRAJ S/O MALLAPPA DASANUR, AGE. 44 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14902 WP No. 101611 of 2025 6. SURESH S/O TIPPANNA DASANUR, AGE. 44 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, RESPONDENT NO.3 TO 6 ARE R/O. AMARGOL VILLAGE, TQ. HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD. 7. VENKAREDDI S/O RANGAREDDI KIRESUR, AGE. 76 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. UNKAL CROSS, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD. 8. MANJUNATH S/O VENKAREDDI KIRESUR, AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. UNKAL CROSS, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, AGA FOR R1; SMT. SHARMILA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R6; SMT. KAVITA S. JADHAV, ADVOCATE FOR R7; NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 03-12- 2024 PASSED ON I.A. NO.21, IN O.S. NO.474/2016 FILED UNDER ORDER 6 RULE 17 R/W SECTION 151 CPC BY THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC III HUBBALLI IN O.S. NO.474/2016 VIDE THE ANNEXURE-H AND DIRECT THE TRIAL COURT II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC III HUBBALLI TO ALLOW THE AMENDMENT SOUGHT IN THE ANNEXURE-G-I, THE I.A. NO.21 UNDER ORDER 6 RULE 17 R/W SECTION 151 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14902 WP No. 101611 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner assailing the order dated 03.12.2024 passed on I.A.No.21 filed under Order VI Rule 17 r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 19081, in O.S.No.474/2016 on the file of II Additional Civil Judge, Hubballi2, marked as Annexure-H. 2. An application to amend the plaint was filed on 02.02.2024, seeking to provide a different description of the eastern and western boundaries of the suit property, along with a few corresponding changes in the plaint. The suit was instituted in 2016. 3. The defendants opposed the amendment application on the premise that application is time barred, and that the proposed amendment would change the nature of the property. The Trial Court has accepted the defendants’ objection and dismissed the application. 1 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘CPC’ 2 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Trial Court’ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14902 WP No. 101611 of 2025 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that merely because there was a delay in filing the application for amendment of the plaint, is not a ground to dismiss the application. It is his submission that the description of the eastern and western boundaries of the suit property is in the nature of correction of typographical error and no prejudice would be caused to the defendants and the defendants will be permitted to file an additional written statement and to lead evidence in the matter. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents/defendants would submit that the plaintiff has not exercised due diligence and application was filed after the defendants commenced their evidence. 6. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records. 7. It is noticed from the proposed amendment that the plaintiff is seeking some changes in the description of the property. However, it appears that the property remains same. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14902 WP No. 101611 of 2025 The amendment probably aims at giving a proper description of the property, so that the property can be clearly identified. 8. It is indeed true that an amendment application has to be filed before the trial commences. However, the jurisdiction of the Court to allow the application after the trial commences, is not completely taken away. To do substantial justice, the Court can certainly permit amendment. 9. Hence, the following: ORDER a) The writ petition is allowed. b) The order dated 03.12.2024 passed on I.A.No.21 filed under Order VI Rule 17 r/w Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in O.S.No.474/2016 on the file of II Additional Civil Judge, Hubballi, marked as Annexure-H, is set aside. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14902 WP No. 101611 of 2025 c) The amendment sought is allowed. The defendants are permitted to file additional written statement. d) Since there is a delay of six years in filing the application for amendment and same is filed when the evidence has commenced, the plaintiff shall pay a cost of ₹5,000/- to the defendants No.7 and 8. e) Payment of cost is a condition precedent to carry out amendment. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE PMP CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 35