- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28137 WP No. 16187 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 16187 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI B.N.LAKSHMAIAH S/O LATE NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT BHEEMANAGUPPE VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK – 560 060 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHOKKAREDDY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. NALLAMMAL W/O S. THANGARAJU AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS 2. SRI.T.UDAYASHANKAR S/O S. THANGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 3. SRI.T.UMASHANKAR S/O S. THANGARAJU AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT NO.23/46 4TH CROSS, ITTUMADU MAIN ROAD, BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU - 85 …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28137 WP No. 16187 of 2026 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ANNEXURE-A ORDER DATED 17.03.2025 ALLOWED THE APPLICATION IN IA NO. 6 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN OS NO.366/2015 PENDING IN 1ST ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT AT BANGALORE BY ALLOWING THE PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the orders passed on I.A.No.6 in O.S.No.366/2015 dated 17.03.2025 by the 1st Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural district, Bangalore, the petitioner- plaintiff is before this Court. 2. The plaintiff has filed the suit seeking specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 23.01.2012. An application is filed by the defendant seeking amendment of the pleadings. It is stated that plaintiff has filed the suit for specific performance and for other reliefs and the defendant has filed a written statement denying the averments and allegations of the plaintiff in the suit. It is stated that the amendment now sought is in respect of subsequent events and also few typographical errors. It is stated that in spite of due diligence, defendants - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28137 WP No. 16187 of 2026 could not add the said events in his written statement and he could not raise the matter before commencement of the evidence of PW.1, it is not intentional and hence the amendment is very much necessary and the same may be allowed. 3. It is stated that after filing of the case, the plaintiff had filed RA before the 9th Additional District and Sessions Court, Bengaluru Rural and few observations were made in the judgment and now the defendant wants to incorporate the said findings of the judgment of the District Court in the written statement and also to bring to the notice of this Court about the judgment passed in RA.No.123/2020 for proper adjudication of the dispute. It is also stated that the amendment sought is necessary for determining the real question in controversy between the parties and amendment sought will not change the defence already taken and it will not prejudice the case of the plaintiff. If this amendment is not allowed, the defendant will be put to lot of hardship. 4. The petitioner/plaintiff has filed his objections. The Trial Court by order impugned has allowed the application. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28137 WP No. 16187 of 2026 While allowing the application, the trial Court has observed that it is the case of the defendant that the proposed amendment is only a typographical error and subsequent events. On perusal of the amendment, it appears that the defendants intended to bring the facts by introducing new paras in respect of subsequent events of OS.No.1516/2012 and RA.No.123/2020, the appeal came to be disposed of on 05.08.2022. On perusal of the records, the written statement filed by the defendant is quite earlier to the disposal of the RA. It is under these circumstances it could not be possible for the defendant to bring the proposed amendment at the time of filing of the written statement and the subsequent events, which requires to be pleaded and it is also observed that allowing the proposed amendment it will not prejudice the other side. The basic fundamental principles of amendment of the pleadings is the proposed amendment is required for determination of real question in controversy between the parties or the proposed amendment could not be brought on record at the earliest in spite of due diligence of the parties. The trial Court has come to the conclusion that, on perusal of the proposed amendment, the Court is of the view that, by allowing the proposed - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28137 WP No. 16187 of 2026 amendment, it will not cause any prejudice to the plaintiff and it helps in determining the real question in controversy between the parties and accordingly allowed the IA.No.VI that is filed by the defendant seeking amendment. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner/plaintiff is before this Court. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/plaintiff submits that the trial Court has framed issues on 08.06.2020. The matter was posted for plaintiff evidence. The plaintiff was examined as PW-1 and got marked Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-20 on 29.10.2021. The matter was posted for cross-examination of PW-1 on 05.08.2022. Thereafter, the respondents have filed the application on 29.11.2022. It is submitted that the judgment in RA cannot be incorporated as pleadings in the written statement. It is submitted that the application is filed after the commencement of the trial and trial Court ought to have dismissed the said application which is filed at a belated stage. The defendant cannot be permitted to amend the pleadings in this manner and it would cause lot of prejudice to the plaintiff. This aspect was not considered by the trial Court. It is submitted that the order impugned needs to be set aside. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28137 WP No. 16187 of 2026 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the material on record. The petitioner herein has filed a suit for specific performance, after the trial has commenced the defendant has filed IA No.VI seeking to amend the written statement, for two reasons. Firstly, to correct the typographical mistakes and secondly he wants to place before the Court the findings of the Court in RA which is subsequent to the commencement of the trial. This Court is not able to understand what is the prejudice that is caused to the plaintiff if this application is allowed and question of filing the application at a later stage would not arise because that event took place at a subsequent date which are not in the knowledge of the defendant when the written statement is filed. In the considered opinion of this Court, the trial Court has rightly considered and rightly allowed the amendment. If an amendment which is necessary to decide the dispute between the parties, which will help the Court to consider the facts in detail, those amendments are necessary and on the ground of technicalities, those applications cannot be dismissed. Hence, this Court finds no reason to interfere. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28137 WP No. 16187 of 2026 7. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. ii. All pending I.As., in this writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE TS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25