- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9326 WP No. 1824 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.1824 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI G SHIVALINGAPPA S/ O. LATE MAHADEVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED) 2. SRI. MALLESHA @ MALLESHAPPA, S/ O. LATE MAHADEVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST BOTH ARE R/AT KENCHIKOPPA VILLAGE NYAMTHI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577 223 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. JAYARAJ D S., ADVOCATE) AND: SMT LALITHA @ LALITHAMMA S R W/O. S. RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS AGRICULTURIST, R/AT KENCHIKOPPA VILLAGE, NYAMTHI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT- 577 223 PRESENTLY R/AT NO. 30/1, LALITHA NIVASA, 1ST CROSS, RAVINDRANAGAR, SHIVAMOGGA CITY- 577 201 …RESPONDENT Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9326 WP No. 1824 of 2026 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS IN O.S.NO.199/2021 PENDING CONSIDERATION ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE COURT OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HONNALI VIDE ANNEXURE - A2. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER This petition by the defendants in O.S.No.199/2021 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Honnali, is directed against the impugned order dated 13.10.2025 passed on I.A.No.IV whereby the said application filed by the respondent-plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 CPC seeking amendment of the plaint was allowed by the Trial Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondent-plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit for permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable properties. The said suit is being contested by the petitioners-defendants and at the stage of cross-examination of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9326 WP No. 1824 of 2026 PW1, the respondent-plaintiff filed the instant application seeking amendment of the plaint by incorporating the relief of declaration together with corresponding pleadings. The said application having been opposed by the petitioners-defendants, the Trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned order allowing I.A.No.IV aggrieved by which the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. The said order reads as under: “ORDER ON I.A. No.IV The plaintiff has filed the present application on 18.06.2024, when the matter has been posted for further chief of PW1. The plaintiff has filed present application under Order VI Rule 17 R/w Section 151 of CPC., seeking for amendment of plaint as under:- Proposed amendment :- 1. After the existing paragraph 10. add- "After the institution of this suit, the aforesaid suit in O.S.No. 108/2021 on the file of this honourable Court came to be decreed with costs by the judgment and decree dated 30.03.2024. By the said judgment and decree it has been held that the first defendant herein is entitled to recover the possession of the suit schedule property from the plaintiff herein. The plaintiff herein has preferred appeal against the said judgment and decree of this Court and the First Appeal - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9326 WP No. 1824 of 2026 in R.A. No.36/2024 on the file of the Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge, Harihar is pending for hearing. In view of the said subsequent event, a cloud is cast on the title of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property and her right to possession thereof. The original reliefs claimed in the suit have become insufficient. Hence the plaintiff is also seeking for additional relief of declaration of her right and possession over the suit schedule properties". 2. In paragraph number 11, after the words on subsequent dates of threat add :- "Subsequently on 30.03.2024, when the judgment and decree in OS No.108/2021 on the file of this honourable Court was passed and a cloud is cast on the title and possession of the posto plaintiff over the suit schedule properties". 3. in the relief column add :- (a) Declaration that the plaintiff is the absolute owner and is in possession of the suit schedule properties". 4. Renumber the existing reliefs (a) and (b) as (b) and (c). 2. The plaintiff has sworn an affidavit in support of the accompanying application wherein she has affirm that, the plaintiff has filed the present suit seeking for a relief of permanent injunction against the defendants in respect of the suit schedule properties. It is further affirm that, subsequently instituted the instant suit, the defendant No.1 had instituted the the suit seeking for recovery the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9326 WP No. 1824 of 2026 possession of the suit schedule property before Additional Civil Judge and JMFC., Honnali and which came to be numbered as 0.5.No.108/2021 and which came to be decreed and being aggrieved against the judgment and decree, the plaintiff had preferred appeal before the Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge, Harihara and which came to be numbered as R.A.No.36/2024 and which is pending consideration. 3. It is further affirm that, in view of the aforesaid subsequent event, the burden is casted upon the plaintiff that to prove the title and possession over the suit schedule properties as on the date of the institution of the suit and the proposed amendment which is very much necessary in order to proper adjudication of the matter in dispute between the parties and the proposed amendment is very much necessary in order to avoid the multiplicity of the proceedings. It is further affirm that, if the present application is not allowed the plaintiff would be put great hardship and irreparable loss which cannot be compensated in terms of the money and on the other hand if the present application is allowed no hardship or injury would be caused to the defendants. Hence, prays to allow the present application. 4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the defendants have filed statement of objection wherein specifically stated that the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of the accompanying application is not proper and denied the same and the application filed by the plaintiff is not maintainable - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9326 WP No. 1824 of 2026 and same is liable to be dismissed with exemplary costs. It is further contend that, the plaintiff had filed the present application seeking for amend the plaint in order to convert the present suit as declaratory suit and thereby it is not possible. It is further contend that, the defendant No.1 had filed O.S.No. 108/2021 before the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC., Honnali and the said suit came to be decreed and subsequently, the plaintiff had refused to comply the said judgment and decree and thereby defendant No.1 had instituted the Execution Petition No. 18/2024 wherein seeking for implementation of the said judgment and decree and same is pending consideration. It is further contend that, as the facts stood at that stage, the plaintiff had filed the present application and same is not maintainable in law. It is further contend that, the plaintiff has filed the present application after commencement of the trial only with an intention to protract the proceedings and if the present application is allowed the defendants would be put to great hardship and irreparable loss and which cannot be compensated in terms of the money and on the other hand if the application is not allowed no hardship or injury would be caused to the plaintiff. Hence prays to dismiss the present application with exemplary costs. 5. Heard on both side.. 6. On going through the application with affidavit and objection, the following points would arise to this Court for determination; - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9326 WP No. 1824 of 2026 1. Whether the plaintiff has made out sufficient ground to amend the plaint? 2. What order? 7. This Court has answer to the above points are as under: Point No.1: In the Affirmative Point No.2: As per the final order for the following: REASONS 8. Point No.1: It is relevant note that, the plaintiff has filed the present suit against the defendants seeking for the relief of permanent injunction with respect to the suit schedule properties. Further, the plaintiff has filed the present application seeking for amend the proposed amendment. 9. Nature and Scope of the provision under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC., is that :- It is settled law that the grant of application for amendment shall be subject to certain conditions, namely, (i) When the nature of it is changed by permitting amendment; (ii) When the amendment would result in introducing new cause of action and intends to prejudice the other party; and (iii) When allowing amendment application defeats the law of limitation. 10. As per the provision the Court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend their - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9326 WP No. 1824 of 2026 pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real question in controversy between the parties. The defendants have objected the application. The proposed amendment is very much necessary for determining the real question in controversy between the parties. If the proposed amendment is not allowed it will infringe the rights of the plaintiff. The proposed amendment does not take away the legal right of the party and it is very much necessary in determining the rights of the parties. At this stage, this Court opines that, it is very much necessary to provide an opportunity to the plaintiff to carryout the amendment in the plaint because said amendment will not cause any injustice whatsoever to the defendants and provision relating to amendment of pleadings must be liberally construed with a view to promote ends of justice and not to defeat. Further, the plaintiff is having every right to add the plaint averments and the defendants have ci opportunities to file additional written statement with regard to the proposed amendment. Further proposed amendment does not change the nature of the suit and not arise new cause of action and the suit is not hit by law of limitation and in order to avoid the multiplicity of the proceedings. The Court finds no impediment to allow the application. Under such circumstances. this Court has answer Point No.1 in the Affirmative. 11. Point No.2: In view of finding on Point No. 1. this Court proceed to pass the following: - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9326 WP No. 1824 of 2026 ORDER I.A.No.IV filed by the plaintiff Under Order VI Rule 17 R/w Sec.151 of C.P.C. is hereby allowed subject to payment of Rs: 300/- which is payable by the plaintiff to the defendants. The learned counsel for the plaintiff is permitted to carry out the amendment in the plaint in accordance with the IA.No.IV and to file amended plaint.” 4. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the Trial Court has come to the conclusion that the proposed amendment is relevant and necessary for the purpose of adjudication of the issues in controversy between the parties. The Trial Court has also come to the correct conclusion that the same is barred by limitation can be adequately safeguarded by directing that the proposed amendment shall not relate back to the date of the suit, and in view of the principles enunciated by the Apex Court in the case of Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Sanjeev Builders Private Limited – AIR 2022 SC 4256 petitioners would be entitled to file additional written statement to the amended plaint and that no prejudice could be said to have been caused to the petitioners if the proposed amendment was allowed as sought for - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9326 WP No. 1824 of 2026 by the plaintiff. It is also pertinent to note that since the petitioners have raised defence of limitation, in the light of the judgments of the Apex Court in Sampath Kumar Vs. Ayyakannu & another – AIR 2002 SC 3369 and L.C. Hanumanthappa Vs. H.B. Shivakumar – (2016) 1 SCC 332, the proposed amendment would necessarily have to be allowed by directing that the proposed amendment shall not relate back to the date of the suit but shall be reckoned / considered from the date of the amendment application filed on 04.07.2024. 5. Under these circumstances and in the light of the judgments of the Apex Court in the aforesaid cases, the impugned order passed by the Trial Court allowing application – I.A.No.IV does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity warranting interference by this Court in exercise of my jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as held in Radhey Shyam Vs. Chhabi Nath - (2015) 5 SCC 423 case. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9326 WP No. 1824 of 2026 6. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby disposed of without interfering with the impugned order. (ii) It is made clear that the proposed amendment as allowed by the Trial Court shall not relate back to the date of the suit but shall be reckoned / considered from 04.07.2024 i.e., from the date on which I.A.No.IV was filed and the question / issue pertaining to limitation is kept open to be decided by the Trial Court, in accordance with law. (iii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioners to file additional written statement to the amended plaint and take up all contentions including limitation. (iv) All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept/left open and no opinion is expressed on merits/demerits of the rival contentions. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8