- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16645 WP No. 111543 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 111543 OF 2017 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. CHANDRU S/O. DODDAHALLAPPA, @ HALLAPPA KOLI @ KOLENNAVAR, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KAMLESHWAR GALLI, AGASAGE VILLAGE, TAL AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. SHANKAR DODDBALLAPA KOLI, AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KAMLESHWAR GALLI, AGASAGE VILLAGE, TAL AND DIST: BELAGAVI. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. D. RAVIKUMAR GOKAKAKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. SHOBHA @ SONA MALLAPPA RANGANNAWAR D/O. KALLAPPA BALLAPPA KOLI @ KOLENNAVAR, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HANMANT GALLI, KHANGAON, TAL AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. SMT. BASAWWA NAGAPPA BALAPANNAWAR D/O. KALLAPPA BALLAPPA KOLI @ KOLENNAVAR, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16645 WP No. 111543 of 2017 R/O: 116, KALMESHWAR NAGAR, SULEBHAVI, TAL AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. SRI. GOPAL SANNAHALLAPA KOLI, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC : AGRICULURE, R/O: NETAJI GALLI, AGASAGA, TAL AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 4. SRI. BALESH SANNAHALLAPA KOLI, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NETAJI GALLI, AGASAGA, TAL AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 5. SRI. BHARMA SANNAHALLAPA KOLI, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NETAJI GALLI, AGASAGA, TAL AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 6. SMT. GUNJAWWA D/O. SANNAHALLAPA KOLI, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: NETAJI GALLI, AGASAGA, TAL AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 7. SMT. CHANDRAWWA W/O. DHONDIBA NANDGADKAR, D/O. SANNAHALLAPPA KOLI, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. 52, HOSUR, TAL: CHANDGAD, DIST: KOLHAPUR, MAHARASTRA. 8. SMT. DEMMAKKA W/O. BHIKAJI MANDALIK, D/O. SANNHALLAPPA KOLI, SMT. DEMMAKKA W/O. BHIKAJI MANDALIK D/O. SANNHALLAPPA KOLI, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16645 WP No. 111543 of 2017 R/O. 1662, LAXMINAGAR, HINDALGA ROAD, CHANDGAD, DIST: KOLHAPUR, MAHARASTRA. 9. SMT. MANSAWWA W/O. MALLAPPA SANMALGOL D/O. KALLAPPA KOLI, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. 1336, LAXMINAGAR, KAKATI, TQ AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 10. SMT. YALLAWWA CHANDRAKANT PURANIKMATH, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: 1336, MARUTI GALLI, SULEBHAVI, TQ AND DIST: BELAGAVI. 11. SRI. KALMESH S/O. KALLAPPA KOLI @ KOLENNAWAR, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KALMESHWAR GALLI, AGASAGA, TQ AND DIST: BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ANNEXURE-A I.E. THE ORDER DATED 17.11.2017 ON I.A.NO.VII IN O.S.NO.133/2012 PASSED BY THE IV ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE BELAGAVI; REJECT I.A.NO.VII FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2 IN O.S.NO.133/2012, PENDING ON THE FILE OF IV ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE BELAGAVI AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16645 WP No. 111543 of 2017 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) This petition is filed assailing the order dated 17.11.2017 permitting the amendment of plaint in a suit for partition and separate possession. 2. The defendants have objected to the said application seeking amendment, on the premise that the plaintiffs are trying to fill up the lacunae in the pleadings. The Trial Court has over- ruled the objection and has permitted the amendment. 3. This Court has perused the proposed amendment. The plaintiffs intend to incorporate few facts which according to them are necessary for adjudication of the case on hand. 4. The Court does not find any error in the order passed by the Trial Court which has permitted the amendment. The Trial Court has also held that no prejudice will be caused to the defendants in case the amendment is allowed. 5. The Court is of the view that the plaintiffs have to establish the contentions raised in the proposed amendment which is permitted by the Trial Court. Defendants can very well - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16645 WP No. 111543 of 2017 file additional written statement to the proposed amendment. Under these circumstances, absolutely there is no merit in the writ petition. 6. Hence the following: ORDER (i) Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE BRN CT:VH LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 2