- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44116 CRP No. 116 of 2019 C/W CRP No. 113 of 2019 CRP No. 114 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 116 OF 2019 (SC) C/W CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 113 OF 2019 (SC), CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 114 OF 2019 (SC), CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 115 OF 2019 (SC) IN CRP No. 116/2019 BETWEEN: SMT. LALITHA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS WIFE OF SRI. NAGARAJU RESIDING AT NO.287, 8TH CROSS 1ST MAIN ROAD, SARASWATHIPURAM NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 096 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. T.V. VIJAY RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. ANANTHALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS WIFE OF SRI SHEKHAR BABU RESIDING AT NO.2670/27 MATTA NILAYA, 11TH MAIN ROAD D BLOCK, 2ND STAGE, GAYATHRINAGAR RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. R. BHADRINATH, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by CHAITHANYA K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44116 CRP No. 116 of 2019 C/W CRP No. 113 of 2019 CRP No. 114 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER THIS CRP IS FILED U/S.18 OF THE KARNATAKA SMALL CAUSES COURTS ACT AGAINST THE ORDER DTD 13.02.2019 PASSED IN SC.NO.2024/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XIII ADDL.JUDGE AND MEMBER MACT COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU ALLOWING THE IA U/O VI R17 OF CPC TO AMEND THE PLAINT. IN CRP NO. 113/2019 BETWEEN: SMT LAKSHMAMMA AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS, W/O LATE SRI VENKATASWAMY NAIDU, R/AT NO.287, 8TH CROSS, IST MAIN ROAD, SARASWATHIPURAM, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 096 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. T.V. VIJAY RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. ANANTHALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS WIFE OF SRI SHEKHAR BABU RESIDING AT NO.2670/27 MATTA NILAYA, 11TH MAIN ROAD D BLOCK, 2ND STAGE, GAYATHRINAGAR RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. R. BHADRINATH, ADVOCATE) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE KARNATAKA SMALL CAUSES COURTS ACT, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 13.02.2019 PASSED ON I.A.IN S.C.NO.2022/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND MEMBER MACT COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44116 CRP No. 116 of 2019 C/W CRP No. 113 of 2019 CRP No. 114 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER BENGALURU, ALLOWING I.A. FILED UNDER ORDER VI RULE 17 OF CPC. FOR PERMIT TO AMEND THE PLAINT. IN CRP NO. 114/2019 BETWEEN: SMT. LALITHA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, WIFE OF SRI NAGARAJU, R/AT NO.287, 8TH CROSS, IST MAIN ROAD, SARASWATHIPURAM, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 096 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. T.V. VIJAY RAGHAVAN.,ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. ANANTHALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS WIFE OF SRI SHEKHAR BABU RESIDING AT NO.2670/27 MATTA NILAYA, 11TH MAIN ROAD D BLOCK, 2ND STAGE, GAYATHRINAGAR RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. R. BHADRINATH, ADVOCATE) THIS CRP FILED UNDER SEC.18 OF THE KARNATAKA SMALL CAUSES COURTS ACT.AGAISNT THE ORDER DATED 13.02.2019 IN SC.NO.2025/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XIII ADDL.JUDGE AND MEMBER MACT.,COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU ALLOWING U/O R17 CPC TO AMEND THE PLAINT. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44116 CRP No. 116 of 2019 C/W CRP No. 113 of 2019 CRP No. 114 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER IN CRP NO. 115/2019 BETWEEN: SMT LAKSHMAMMA AGEDA BOUT 88 YEARS WIFE OF LATE SRI VENKATASWAMY NAIDU RESIDING AT NO.287 8TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN ROAD SARASWATHIPURAM NANDINI LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560 096. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. T.V. VIJAY RAGHAVAN.,ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. ANANTHALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS WIFE OF SRI SHEKHAR BABU RESIDING AT NO.2670/27 MATTA NILAYA, 11TH MAIN ROAD D BLOCK, 2ND STAGE, GAYATHRINAGAR RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. R. BHADRINATH, ADVOCATE) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE KARNATAKA SMALL CAUSES COURTS ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 13.02.2019 PASSED ON I.A IN S.C.NO. 2023/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, AND MEMBER MACT, COURT OF - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44116 CRP No. 116 of 2019 C/W CRP No. 113 of 2019 CRP No. 114 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, ALLOWING THE I.A. FILED UNDER ORDER VI RULE 17 OF CPC FOR PERMISSION TO AMEND THE PLAINT. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri.T.V.Vijay Raghavan, learned counsel for the revision petitioners. 2. These revision petitions are filed by the defendant as per the following tabular column: Small Cause Suit No. Plaintiff Defendant 2024/2016 Ananthalakshmi Lalitha 2022/2016 Ananthalakshmi Lakshmamma 2025/2016 Ananthalakshmi Lalitha 2023/2016 Ananthalakshmi Lakshmamma - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44116 CRP No. 116 of 2019 C/W CRP No. 113 of 2019 CRP No. 114 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER 3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the revision petitions are as under: 3.1. A suit for ejectment came to be filed in all these suits in respect of the immovable property as per the plaint schedule in the respective suits. 3.2. Plaintiff filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC. 4. Learned Trial Judge on contest, allowed the application and also stated that amendment carried out in the very same order and directed that the amended plaint to be filed. 5. For the sake of clarity and certainty, the impugned order in SC No.2024/2016 is culled out hereunder and similar orders are passed in other small cause suits as well: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44116 CRP No. 116 of 2019 C/W CRP No. 113 of 2019 CRP No. 114 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER “Heard on both side on IA. Order on U/o VI rule 17 of CPC. Advocate for pl filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC prays to amend the plaint as sought in the IA. Perused affidavit of IA, it has been prays to incorporated para No.3(a) after para No.3, in that he has narrated as he is the owner and possession of the suit schedule property, further narrated he has acquired said property by way of register sale deed dated 05.03.2010, this is the sum and substance of intend to insert in the plaint by way of amendment. The de has been filed objection to such application and appose to allow the application and contended that already evidence has been commenced and in order to fulfill the lacuna and latches and hence, prays to dismiss the application. The plaintiff has filed present suit for ejectment and now the stage is for cross of P.W.1, as such the proposed amendments are not change the nature and scope of the suit; as such the defendant has got right to file the objection to the proposed amendment. Further, the proposed amendment is with respect of ownership of the property. This, it - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44116 CRP No. 116 of 2019 C/W CRP No. 113 of 2019 CRP No. 114 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER is relevant to the court for effective adjudication of matter. If IA is allowed no will be cause to other side, if it is not allowed it will be cause to plaintiff and he has face the multiplicity proceedings. Under these circumstances it is just and necessary to allowing the IA. Hence, IA is allowed. Accordingly, permit to amend the plaint. Amendment carried out. For amended plaint by: 18.02.2019.” 6. What is now sought to be questioned before the Court is that a composite order whereby allowing the amendment and also making a observation that ‘amendment carried out’ and ‘for amended plaint’. 7. It is a procedural error and not affecting the rights of the parties in any manner and thus not revisable. 8. Defendant has got the right of filing additional objections to the amended portion of the plaint. 9. With that liberty, this Court is of the considered opinion that no revisional jurisdiction cannot be exercised in the case so as to set aside the order. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44116 CRP No. 116 of 2019 C/W CRP No. 113 of 2019 CRP No. 114 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER 10. Accordingly, following: ORDER Civil revision petitions are dismissed. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47 CT: BHK