- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15563 WP No. 108541 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 108541 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. MAHANTAWWA SHIRAGUMPI W/O KALAKAPPA SHIRAGUMPI, AGE. 75 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD. 2. SMT. KAVITA W/O FAKEERAGOUDA SIRAGUMPI, AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, BOTH ARE R/O. BALUTAGI, TQ. YELBURGA, DIST. KOPPAL-583 231. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SADIQALI N. GOODWALA, ADVOCATE) AND: SHIVASHARANAGOUDA S/O SHIRAGUMPI, ADOPTED S/O KALKAPPA SHIRAGUMPI, AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. H.NO.EWS 173, ASHOK NAGAR, BELAGAVI, TQ. AND DIST. BELAGAVI-590 001. … RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 01.08.2025 PASSED BY CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, YELBURGA ON I.A. NO.3 IN O.S. NO.319/2020 VIDE ANNEXURE- D. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15563 WP No. 108541 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. 2. This petition is filed assailing the order dated 01.08.2025 allowing the amendment sought by the plaintiff. The suit is filed in the year 2020. Application seeking amendment at I.A.No.2 is filed in the year 2022. Evidence has not yet commenced. 3. The suit is for injunction. In plaint paragraph No.1, the plaintiff states that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the lands bearing Survey No.3/4 measuring 4 acres 1 gunta, Survey No.65 measuring 16 acres 24 guntas of Balutagi village, Taluk Yelburga. The aforementioned properties are said to be the suit properties. 4. By way of an amendment, the plaintiff seeks to incorporate a prayer for declaration of title that he is the owner. In addition to that, he has prayed to incorporate few facts relating to the compromise decree passed by the Court on 18.06.2018. In the proposed amendment, the plaintiff also - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15563 WP No. 108541 of 2025 makes reference to the stand taken by the defendants in the written statement. The Trial Court has held that it has heard both sides and passed an order allowing the application for amendment. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/defendants Sri Sadiqali N. Goodwala would submit that the order sheet would reveal that the defendants were not present and in the impugned order, the Trial Court states that it heard both sides. It is his submission that the defendants were not present. As such the defendants are not heard and the matter has to be remitted to the Trial Court to hear the defendants before passing the order. 6. It is indeed true that the statement in the order sheet would reflect that defendants were not present. It appears that the Trial Court has not heard the defendants. To do complete justice to the parties, the Court has heard learned counsel Sri Sadiqali N.Goodwala extensively on the objection filed by the defendants and the arguments of defendants would have addressed before the Trial Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15563 WP No. 108541 of 2025 7. Learned counsel for the defendants would urge that the proposed amendment would change the nature of the suit as the suit for injunction is sought to be converted into a suit for declaration and injunction. 8. It is relevant to notice that in the plaint paragraph No.1, the plaintiff has asserted that he is the owner of the property and is in possession of the property. Thus, even when the suit was filed, the plaintiff could have claimed the relief of declaration of right and title, as the statement is already there relating to his title and possession of the property. 9. In addition to that, the plaintiff intends to incorporate few things relating to the compromise decree which is not in dispute. He has also made reference to the stand taken by the defendants in the written statement which he could have done by way of a rejoinder. 10. Under the circumstances, this Court does not find any error in the order passed by the Trial Court which has rightly allowed the application for amendment. 11. Hence, the petition is dismissed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15563 WP No. 108541 of 2025 12. Needless to say that the defendants are at liberty to file additional written statement to the amended written statement. 13. It is also made clear that merely because the amendment ordered by the Trial Court is confirmed, it should not be construed as having reflected anything on the merits of the claim of the plaintiff. 14. All contentions are kept open to be decided by the Trial Court on merits. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE KGK/CLK CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 31