- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14695 WP No. 107992 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 107992 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. BASANAGOUDA S/O AJJANAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, 2. SHRI GIRISHGOUDA S/O AJJANAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, 3. SMT. SHANTAVVA W/O AJJANAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, 4. SMT. SUSHEELA W/O BASANAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, 5. SMT. SUJATA W/O GIRIYAPPAGOUDA PATIL, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, OCC. AGRICULTURE, Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14695 WP No. 107992 of 2025 (ALL ARE R/O. ARISHINAGUPPI VILLAGE, TQ. HANGAL, DIST. HAVERI). … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SANTOSH B. MANE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. PREMA W/O SHANKARGOUDA GIREGOUDAR, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, 2. SHANKARGOUDA S/O MALLANAGOUDA GIREGOUDAR, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, (BOTH ARE R/O. ARISHINAGUPPI VILLAGE, TQ. HANGAL, DIST. HAVERI). … RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.08.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HANAGAL ON I.A. NO.13 IN O.S. NO.242/2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-F. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14695 WP No. 107992 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) This petition is filed assailing the order permitting the amendment to the plaint. 2. The suit is one for declaration and possession. Then the plaintiffs seek amendment to incorporate a plea that the structure put up by the defendants during the pendency of the suit is to be removed. 3. The defendants in said suit filed objection to the application on the premise that the application is filed belatedly when the case is posted for reply argument and is impermissible. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for petitioners that in case the amendment is allowed, the case will be reopened and there has to be a fresh trial in respect of amended portion. 5. This Court is of the view that in case the fresh trial is ordered, the defendants will not be put to any prejudice - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14695 WP No. 107992 of 2025 as the defendants are said to be in possession of the property and the suit itself is for declaration of possession. The amendment is sought according to the plaintiffs relating to the developments that have taken place during the pendency of the suit. 6. Under these circumstances, this Court does not find any error in the order passed by the Trial Court permitting the amendment. Petition is dismissed. 7. It is made clear that merely because the amendment is permitted that does not mean that there is an encroachment. The alleged encroachment has to be established. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE NAA CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 20