- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44918 WP No. 5390 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 5390 OF 2023 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT MACHANGAA NEELAMMA BIDDAPPA W/O. MACHANGADA BIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO. 160/A, H BLOCK, 3RD MAIN CROSS, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, MYSORE- 570 022 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATH PRASAD H N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT AMBICA RANI SUBHASH S/O. LATE. MATHANDA BELLIAPPA BOPANNA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 2. MASTER M. B. MATHANDA VRISHANK BOPANNA S/O. LATE MATHANDA BELLIAPPA BOPANNA, AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, SMT. AMBICA RANI SUBHASH, BOTH ARE R/AT NO. 37, OM KRUPA, BELLUMADU VILLAGE AND POST, VIRAJPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT-571 211. 3. SRI. MACHANGADA BIDDAPPA S/O. MACHANGADA, Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44918 WP No. 5390 of 2023 AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO.160/A, H BLOCK, 3RD MAIN CROSS, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, MYSORE-570 022. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SACHIN B S., ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; V/O DTD 10.03.2023, NOTICE TO R3 IS D/W) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN OS. NO.77/2018 ON THE FILE OF ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT VIRAJPET, AND PERUSE THE SAME. QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 02.12.2022 PASSED ON IA NO. 9 IN OS. NO.77/2018 BY THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., AT VIRAJPET, PRODUCED AT ANNX-A AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE IA NO.9, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by defendant No.1 with a prayer to set aside the order dated 02.12.2022 passed on I.A.No.9 in O.S.No.77/2018 by the Court of Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Virajpet. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44918 WP No. 5390 of 2023 3. O.S.No.77/2018 is filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein before the Jurisdictional Civil Court at Virajipet seeking the relief of permanent injunction and declaration in respect of the suit schedule property. The prayer made in the suit was opposed by the contesting defendants by filing detailed written statement. After the issues were framed in the suit, the plaintiffs had filed I.A.No.9 under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC seeking permission of the Trial Court to amend the plaint in O.S.No.77/2018. The said application was opposed by the contesting defendants by filing objection. The Trial Court vide the order impugned has allowed the said application and being aggrieved by the same, defendant No.1 is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that the proposed amendment changes the nature of the suit as well as the cause of action of the suit. Suit was initially filed for permanent injunction and declaration. In the proposed amendment, the relief of declaration is sought to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44918 WP No. 5390 of 2023 be withdrawn, which is not permissible. In support of his arguments, he has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA VS SANJEEV BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. - (2022) SCC OnLine SC 1128. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing for the contesting respondents submits that the plaintiff is the master of the suit. The proposed amendment does not change either the cause of action of the suit or the nature of the suit. Application is filed well within time and therefore even the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 would not be applicable in the present case. It is trite that liberal view has to be taken while considering an application for amendment in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings. Accordingly, he pray to dismiss the petition. 6. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein have filed O.S.No.77/2018 before the Jurisdictional Civil Court - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44918 WP No. 5390 of 2023 seeking the relief of permanent injunction and declaration in respect of the suit schedule properties. Prayer in the suit is opposed by filing written statement. I.A.No.9 was filed under Order VI Rule 17 even before the recording of evidence of the parties had commenced in O.S.No.77/2018. In the application for amendment, prayer is made to correct certain factual aspects by incorporating the proposed amendments in paragraph Nos.3, 8, 9(a), 13 and 23. In addition to the aforesaid, a prayer is also made to amend the schedule and delete prayer no-B i.e., the prayer column which relates to the relief of declaration. 7. Perusal of the proposed amendment would go to show that the proposed amendment does not in any manner change the nature of the suit or the cause of action to file the suit. It is trite that application filed seeking amendment of the plaint or written statement should be considered liberally in order to avoid multiplicity of litigation and also to enable proper adjudication of the dispute involved between the parties. In the case of LIFE - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44918 WP No. 5390 of 2023 INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA VS SANJEEV BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph No. 71.2 has observed that all amendments are to be allowed which are necessary for determining the real question in controversy, provided it does not cause injustice or prejudice to the other side. This is apparent from the use of the words shall in the later part of Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC. In paragraph Nos.17.2 & 71.3 - it is further observed in the said case as follows: " 71.2. All amendments are to be allowed which are necessary for determining the real question in controversy provided it does not cause injustice or prejudice to the other side. This is mandatory, as is apparent from the use of the word “shall”, in the latter part of Order 6 Rule 17CPC. 71.3. The prayer for amendment is to be allowed: 71.3.1. If the amendment is required for effective and proper adjudication of the controversy between the parties. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44918 WP No. 5390 of 2023 71.3.2. To avoid multiplicity of proceedings, provided (a) the amendment does not result in injustice to the other side, (b) by the amendment, the parties seeking amendment do not seek to withdraw any clear admission made by the party which confers a right on the other side, and (c) the amendment does not raise a time-barred claim, resulting in divesting of the other side of a valuable accrued right (in certain situations)." 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on paragraph No. 71.10 of the judgment passed in the case of LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA VS SANJEEV BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED (supra), in support of this argument. In the present case, the proposed amendment does not in any way change the nature of the suit or the cause of action, nor the proposed amendment makes out an entirely new case and therefore, I am of the opinion that the Trial Court was fully justified in allowing I.A.No.9 and I do not find any illegality - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44918 WP No. 5390 of 2023 or irregularity in the said order. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. 9. Pending I.A's, if any, do not survive for consideration and the same are accordingly, disposed of. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE KVR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28