- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45496 WP No. 11116 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 11116 OF 2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. VENKATALAKSHMAMMA W/O SRI B. NAGAPPA AGEDA BOUT 65 YEARS R/AT BANASVATHI VILLAGE ARUDI POST SASALU HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT BANGALORE - 561 204. …PETITIONER (BY SRI NAVEEN KUMAR N, ADV., FOR SRI PRAKASH SHENOY P, ADV.) AND: 1. 1a. SRI DASAPPA S/O LATE SRI VENTKATEGOWDA SINICE DEAD RP BY LRS B.D. SIDDAPPA S/O LATE DASAPPA AGED 50 YEARS 1b. B.D. MANJUNATHA S/O LATE DASAPPA AGED 38 YEARS. 1c. B.D. SRINIVAS S/O LATE DASAPPA AGED 30 YEARS. DEFENDANT NO.1(a) TO 1(c) ARE R/AT BANAVATHI VILLAGE AURDI POST, SASALU HOBLI DODDBALLAPUR TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45496 WP No. 11116 of 2021 BANGALORE - 561 204. 1d. PUTTALAKSHMI W/O LATE HANUMANTARAYA D/O LATE DASAPPA AGED 51 YEARS R/AT NAGARHENAHALLI GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK THONDEBHAVI HOBLI TARIDAL POST, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT, PIN CODE - 561 213. 1e. NARASAMMA @ SANNI W/O MURTHY D/O LATE DASAPPA AGED 45 YEARS R/AT HOLATHALU KORATAGERE TALUK CHANNARAYANADURGA HOBLI KURAMKOTE POST TUMKUR DISTRICT PIN CODE - 572 132. 1f. YESHODHA W/O RAMESH D/O LATE DASAPPA AGED 40 YEARS R/AT BANAVATHI VILLAGE ARUDI POST DODDABALLAPUR TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT BANGALORE - 561 204. 1g. KAMALAMMA W/O LATE DASAPPA AGED 65 YEARS R/AT BANAVATHI VILLAGE ARUDI POST, DODDABALALPUR TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE - 561 204. 2. SRI VENKTARAVANAPPA S/O LATE SRI VENKATEGOWDA SINCE DEAD REP BY LRS. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45496 WP No. 11116 of 2021 2a. SMT. CHOWDAMMA W/O LATE SRI VENKTARAVANAPPA AGEDA BOUT 63 YEARS. 2b. SRI DEVARAJA S/O LATE SRI VENKATARANAPPA AGEDA BOUT 45 YEARS. 2c. SRI VENKATARAJA S/O LATE SRI VENKATORANAPPA AGED 40YEARS. DEFENDANT NO.2(a) TO 2(c) ALL ARE R/O BANAVATHI VILLAGE SASALU HOBLI, DODDABALLAPUR TLAUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE - 561 204. 2d. SRI SUNANDAMMA W/O LATE SRI VENAKTARAVANAPPA GED ABOUT 43 YEARS DOGGANAHALLY VILLAGE MALLEKAVU POST CHANNARAYAADURGA HOBLI KOARATAGERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 129. 3e. SMT. SHARADAMMA D/O LATE SRI VENKATARAVANAPPA AGEDABOUT 42 YEARS R/O NO 202, I MAIN ROAD 3RD CROSS MARUTHI LAYOUT CHOKKASANDRA BANGALORE - 560 057. 3. SMT. M. ANASUYAMMA W/O B.D. SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT 4TH CROSS MUTHYALAMMA TEMPLE STREET DODDBALLAPUR TOWN BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT BANGALORE - 561 203. …RESPONDENTS - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45496 WP No. 11116 of 2021 (R-2 (a) SERVED; R-2(b) R-2(c) & R-2 (d) SERVED; V/O DATED : 06.07.2021; SRI B. K.Y. RAJ, ADV., FOR LRs OF D-1/R-1(a TO g) & R-3/R-3 BEFORE TRIAL COURT V/O DATED 01.08.2025, NOTICE TO R-1(a-d), R-1(f), R-1(g) R-2(e) & R-3 ARE H/S, NOTICE TO R-1(e)- H/S; R-1(e) NOTICE TO R-2 (a-e) ARE D/W) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTILCE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 26.05.2021 PASSED BY ADDL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT DODDABALLAPUR, IN O.S.NO.102/1997 ON I.A. DTD. 22.02.2021 FILED UNDER ORDER 6 RULE 17 OF CPC IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PLAINTIFF, VIDE ANNX-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. The plaintiff is before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to set-aside the order dated 26.05.2021 passed on I.A. dated 22.02.2021 and 26.03.2021 filed under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC by the Court of Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Doddaballapur in O.S.No.102 of 1997. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Suit in O.S.No.102 of 1997 is filed by the petitioner seeking the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property and also to declare the gift deed dated 29.10.2005 executed by defendant No.1(a) is not binding on - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45496 WP No. 11116 of 2021 the plaintiff. The prayer made in the suit was opposed by the contesting defendants by filing written statement. I.A. dated 22.02.2021 and 26.03.2021 were filed on behalf of the plaintiff in O.S.No.102 of 1997 under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC with a prayer to amend the plaint. Vide the order impugned, the trial Court has dismissed I.A dated 22.02.2021 and has partly allowed the I.A dated 26.03.2021. Being aggrieved by the order impugned insofar as it relates to dismissing the prayer made in I.A dated 22.02.2021, the petitioner / plaintiff is before this Court. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that proposed amendment does not change the nature of suit or the cause of action in filing the suit. The suit is at the stage of recording evidence plaintiff's evidence. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition. 5. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that, the trial Court had earlier decreed O.S.No.102 of 1997 and as against the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.102 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45496 WP No. 11116 of 2021 of 1997, the contesting defendants had filed R.A.No.62 of 2009 before the first appellate Court and vide the judgement and order dated 02.09.2014, R.A.No.62 of 2009 was allowed and the matter was remitted to the trial court to dispose of the suit afresh. I.A dated 22.02.2021 was filed on behalf of plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC seeking for amendment of the plaint. The proposed amendment in I.A No.22.02.2021 was opposed by the defendants and the trial Court has dismissed the prayer made in the said application. In my considered view, the proposed amendment will not change the nature of the suit or the cause of action in filing the suit. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the said application was filed after remitting and the appellate Court has reserved liberty for the parties to give additional evidence before the trial Court. 6. A reading of the impugned order would go to show that, the trial Court has recorded the findings on merits of the case while considering the prayer made on application dated 22.02.2021, which is not permissible. It is trite that application for amendment of pleadings, in normal circumstances should be allowed unless the same causes serious prejudice to the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45496 WP No. 11116 of 2021 other side or has the effect of changing in the nature of the suit or the cause of action of the suit. The proposed amendment in the present case is only to rectify the survey number of an item of the suit schedule property and also to reduce the extent of land in respect of another item of suit schedule property. In my considered view, the proposed amendment will not cause any hardship or injury to the other side. The Courts are expected to be liberal while considering applications for amendment of pleadings in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and hyper technical approach should be avoided by the Courts while considering an application for amendment of pleadings. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the trial Court was not justified in rejecting a prayer made in the application dated 22.02.2021 filed on the behalf of the plaintiff. 7. Accordingly, the following:- ORDER (i) Writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated order dated 26.05.2021 passed on I.A. dated 22.02.2021 filed under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC by the Court of Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Doddaballapur in O.S.No.102 of - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45496 WP No. 11116 of 2021 1997 is set aside and consequently the prayer made in the said application is granted. Pending IAs' do not survive for consideration and accordingly the same are disposed of. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE NMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46