- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18354 WP No. 107891 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 107891 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. SUMMAVVA W/O. MAHADEV KARAGULI, AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE AND HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. KUMBAR ONI, JAMKHANDI, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587301. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GIRISH A. YADAWAD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BHIMAPPA S/O. SIDALINGAPPA YAMAGAR, AGE. 85 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KUNCHANUR ROAD FARM HOUSE, JAMKHANDI, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587301. 2. SMT. YANKAVVA W/O. BHIMAPPA YAMAGAR, AGE. 81 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE AND HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. KUNCHANUR ROAD FARM HOUSE, JAMKHANDI, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587301. SINCE DECEASED HER LR’S, RESPONDENT NO.1, 3 TO 6 ARE TREATED AS LR’S OF DECEASED RESPONDENT NO.2 Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.12.19 16:10:04 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18354 WP No. 107891 of 2025 CAUSE TITLE AMENDED AS PER ORDER DATED 17.12.2025. 3. SIDDAPPA S/O. BHIMAPPA YAMAGAR, AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KUNCHANUR ROAD FARM HOUSE, JAMKHANDI, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587301. 4. SMT. YELLAWWA W/O. AJEET HUDEDAR, AGE. 61 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE AND HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. NANDAGANV, TQ. ATHANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591001. 5. SMT. RUKMAVVA W/O. MALLAPPA DHAVALESHWAR, AGE. 36 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE AND HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. SHIROL, TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT-587313. 6. SMT. SUNANDA W/O. KAREPPA HUNASHIKATTI, AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE AND HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. LINGANUR, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT-587301. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VADIRAJ PADAKANDLA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R3-R6 IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 11.09.2025 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, JAMKHANDI, I.A. NO.32 IN O.S.NO.70/2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION IN I.A. NO.32 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND PERMIT TO AMEND THE PETITIONER TO PLAINT AS PER ANNEXURE-D, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18354 WP No. 107891 of 2025 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) This petition is filed assailing the order dated 11.09.2025 passed on I.A.No.XXXII under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 19081, in O.S.No.70/2019 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Jamkhandi2. 2. The Trial Court rejected the application seeking amendment of plaint. The said application was rejected on the premise that the application is filed at the stage of defendants' arguments. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the amendment proposed relates to certain transactions relating to some of the suit properties, which are necessary for adjudication of the case at hand. Thus, he would 1 For short, ‘Code’ 2 For short, ‘Trial Court’ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18354 WP No. 107891 of 2025 contend that amendment is necessary for determining the real controversy between the parties. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/defendants would oppose the application for amendment on the premise that it has been filed belatedly and that no ground is made out to show that despite due diligence, the petitioner could not have incorporated the proposed amendment in the original plaint. 5. The Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused records. 6. The suit is one for partition and separate possession. The proposed amendment relates to certain facts which, according to the petitioner, pertain to the suit properties. The amendment, if allowed, does not change the nature of the suit. Further, the proposed amendment does not affect the relief sought in the plaint. Thus, the proposed amendment is not governed by the law of limitation. 7. The Trial Court has not appreciated the contentions properly. This kind of amendment is certainly permissible in view - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18354 WP No. 107891 of 2025 of the law laid by the Apex Court in Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. Sanjeev Builders Private Limited and Another.3 . 8. Hence, the following: ORDER a) The petition is allowed. b) The order dated 11.09.2025 passed on I.A.No.XXXII under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in O.S.No.70/2019 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Jamkhandi, is set aside. c) I.A.No.XXXII filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in O.S.No.70/2019 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Jamkhandi, is allowed. 3 (2002) 16 SCC 1 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18354 WP No. 107891 of 2025 d) The respondents are permitted to file additional written statement. e) It is to be noticed that the application is filed at a belated stage. Under the circumstances, the plaintiff shall also pay a cost of ₹5,000/- to the respondents. f) Payment of cost is condition precedent for permitting the amendment. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE PMP CT-MCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 16