- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18397 WP No. 107450 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 107450 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. NETRAVATI W/O BHEEMANAGOUDA PATIL, AGE. 39 YEARS, OCC. GOVT. SERVANT, R/O. BEHIND BUS STAND, SHINGARKOPA, ASUNDI, TQ. AND DIST. BELAGAVI-591 126. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. IRANAGOUDA K. KABBUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. DHEERAJ URF. DHIRENDRASWAMI TUKARAMSA LADWA, AGE. 48 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS AND AGRICULTURE, R/O. NARAGTA COLONY, DHARWAD, TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD-580 002. 2. SMT. TEJASWANI W/O SHANKAR GANIGI, AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KRISHI NAGAR, PRACHI SHOPEE, DHARWAD, TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD-580 002. 3. SMT. MAHADEVI URF. MEDHAVIPRIYADARSHINI W/O PRASHANT DESHMUKH, AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC. SERVICE, R/O. #22, SPENCER AVENUE, THURMASTON, Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18397 WP No. 107450 of 2024 LEICESTER, UNITED KINGDOM-LE4, EL4. 4. MR. ABHIMAN S/O GURUPASABBA HALAKATTI, AGE. 50 YEARS, OCC. SERVICE, R/O. A7, UJWAL BUNGLOW, SUYOJIT LAWNS, NEAR RATHI FARM, MAHATMA NAGAR, NASIK-422 005, STATE: MAHARASHTRA. 5. SMT. OJASWINI W/O SAMEER JADHAV, AGE. 47 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KRISHI NAGAR, PRACHI SHOPEE, DHARWAD, TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD-580 003. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAQBOOLAHAMED M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2, R4 AND R5 IS SERVED; NOTICE TO R3 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC-II, DHARWAD ON IA NO.2, U/ORD. 6 RULE 17 R/W SECTION 151 CPC DATED 28.11.2024 IN O.S. NO.383/2019 AT ANNEXURE-E AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE IA AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18397 WP No. 107450 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) This petition is filed assailing the order dated 28.11.2024 passed on I.A.No.2 in O.S.No.383/2019 on the file of II Additional Civil Judge, Dharwad1. 2. The Trial Court allowed I.A.No.2 filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 19082 and permitted amendment of plaint. 3. The suit was filed in the year 2019 seeking the reliefs of declaration and injunction. The application for amendment of the plaint was filed in the year 2024, i.e., four years after the institution of the suit, whereby the plaintiff seeks a relief of specific performance. 4. Admittedly, when the suit is filed, the property had already been sold to defendant No.5. Defendants No.1 to 4, who had executed an agreement for sale on 05.11.2015, according to the plaintiff, violated the terms and conditions of the said agreement and executed a Sale Deed in favour of 1 For short, ‘Trial Court’ 2 For short, ‘Code’ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18397 WP No. 107450 of 2024 defendant No.5 on 28.05.2019, despite there is an agreement for sale in favour of the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff had a cause of action to file a suit for specific performance at the time when the suit was instituted in 2019. The plaintiff did not seek leave under Order II Rule 2 of the Code. After the commencement of trial, the plaintiff filed the application for amendment of the plaint to seek the relief of specific performance. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would rely upon the judgment of the Apex Court in K. Raheja Constructions Ltd. and Another Vs. Alliance Ministers and Others3. The Court has held that amendment sought after the period of limitation from the cause of action shown in the original plaint cannot be allowed. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents would rely upon the judgment of the Apex Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. Sanjeev Builders Private Limited and Another.4. In the aforementioned judgment, the Apex Court has held that as under: 3 1995 Supl. (3) SCC 17 4 2022 (16) SCC 1 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18397 WP No. 107450 of 2024 “The amendment does not raise a time barred claim, resulting in divesting of the other side of a valuable accrued right (in certain situations).” “A prayer for amendment is generally required to be allowed unless by the amendment, a time barred claim is sought to be introduced, in which case the fact that the claim would be time barred becomes a relevant factor for consideration.” 7. In the instant case, as already noticed, the relief claimed by way of specific performance is time barred. The plaintiff had prior knowledge of the refusal to perform the agreement for sale, as defendants No.1 to 4 had executed a sale deed in favour of defendant No.5. 8. Hence, the following: ORDER a) The petition is allowed. b) I.A.No.2 filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18397 WP No. 107450 of 2024 Procedure, 1908, seeking amendment is rejected. c) The order dated 28.11.2024 passed on I.A.No.2 in O.S.No.383/2019 on the file of II Additional Civil Judge, Dharwad, is set aside. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE PMP CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 4