- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2801 WP No. 104347 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. 104347 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. HANAMANTAPPA S/O DYAVANAGOUDA MALAGOUDAR, AGE. 68 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE/COOLIE, R/O. HULAGINAL, NOW R/AT DAVANAGERE, BEHIND I.T. COLLEGE, OPPOSITE YOGESH PROVISION STORE, SAYYAD PHEER LAYOUT, NITAVALLI, DAVANAGERE, WARD, NO. 37. 2. MAILARAPPA S/O DYAVANAGOUDA MALAGOUDAR, AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE/COOLIE, REST – DO- 3. BASAVARAJ @ BASAVARAJAPPA S/O DYAVANAGOUDAR MALAGOUDAR, AGE. 49 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE/COOLIE, REST – DO- 4. SMT. INDRAMMA W/O NEELAPPA MALAGOUDAR AGE. 48 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE HOLD WORK, R/O. HULAGINAL, NOW R/AT DAVANAGERE, REST – DO- 5. SMT. SUKANYA D/O NELAPPA MALAGOUDAR AGE. 33 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLDWORK R/O. HULAGINAL, NOW R/AT DAVANAGERE, REST – DO- …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. S. B. HEBBALLI, ADV) AND: 1. SMT. HANAMAVVA W/O NAGAPPA DODAMANI AGE. MAJOR, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.02.21 12:32:21 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2801 WP No. 104347 of 2022 R/O. HULAGINAL, TAL. HUNAGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587118. 2. HULAPPA S/O NAGAPPA DODAMANI AGE. MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. HULAGINAL, TAL. HUNAGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587118. 3. SHIVAPPA S/O NAGAPPA DODAMANI AGE. MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. HULAGINAL, TAL. HUNAGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587118. 4. LAXMAN S/O NAGAPPA DODAMANI AGE. MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. HULAGINAL, TAL. HUNAGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587118. 5. CHILLAPPA S/O NAGAPPA DODAMANI AGE. MAJOR, OCC. AGRICUTURE, R/O. HULAGINAL, TAL. HUNAGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587118. 6. DURAGAPPA S/O NAGAPPA DODAMANI AGE. MAJOR, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. HULAGINAL, TAL. HUNAGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT-587118. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAKASH HOSAMANE, ADV FOR R1 TO R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 01-10-2022 PASSED BY SR. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HUNAGUND ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE HUNAGUND A COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND ALLOW THE I.A. NO. 5 FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR AMENDMENT OF THEIR PLAINT. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2801 WP No. 104347 of 2022 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRL. HEARING IN ‘B’, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: 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 petitioners/plaintiffs, challenging the order passed on I.A.V dated 1.10.2022 in O.S.No.53/2019, by the Senior Civil Judge, Hunagund. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows : The petitioners/plaintiffs filed the suit in O.S.No.53/2019 for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction in respect of the suit properties. Respondent No.1 filed the written statement. The petitioners filed I.A.V seeking to amend the plaint as per the proposed amendment. The said application was opposed by the respondents by filing objections. The trial Court, after hearing the parties, rejected the application. Hence this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondents. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in spite of due diligency, the petitioners could not seek for amendment. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2801 WP No. 104347 of 2022 He submits that the proposed amendment is an alternative prayer. He submits that the proposed amendment does not change the nature of the case nor the cause of action. He submits that the application may be allowed on cost. He further submits that the trial Court has committed an error in rejecting the application. Accordingly, prays to allow the writ petition. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents supported the impugned order and prays to dismiss the writ petition. 6. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 7. It is not in dispute that the petitioners filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondents. When the case was posted for further cross examination of DWs.2 and 3, the petitioners felt that, in case, if the Court comes to the conclusion that the petitioners are not entitled to the main relief, therefore, has sought for an alternative relief. 8. From the perusal of the contents of the affidavit accompanying the application, the petitioners have shown that, in spite of due diligency, they could not amend the plaint. The - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2801 WP No. 104347 of 2022 proposed amendment does not change the nature of the case nor the cause of action. If the application for amendment is allowed, the respondents can be compensated in terms of money and they can file additional written statement to the amended portion of the plaint. 9. In view of the above discussion, the following order is passed : ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed; ii) The impugned order is set aside. iii) I.A.V is allowed, subject to the payment of cost of Rs.1,00,000/-, payable by the petitioners to the respondents, on the next date of hearing, before the trial Court. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE rs CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34