- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26412 WP No. 16240 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 16240 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI G S NARAYANAMURTHY S/O LATE SRINIVASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, RETIRED GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE, R/O SIDDANAMATHA VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANGERE DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANTOSH R. NELKUDRI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT ANUSUYAMMA W/O LAXMANA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, HOME MAKER, R/O DEVARAHALLI VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 2. SMT. KARIYAMMA @ KAMALAMMA W/O HANUMANTHAPPA B.T. AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST R/O GODABANHALU VILLAGE CHITRADUGE TQ AND DIST Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26412 WP No. 16240 of 2026 3. SRI. GIRISH S/O SHREERANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST CHANNAGIRI TQ DAVANAGERE DIST 4. N. PAVITHRA D/O LATE. NARASIMHAPPA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE R/O CHANNAPPA BADAVANE, WARD NO.6 HOLALKERE TOWN AND TALUK CHITDRADURGA DIST. 5. N. GOWTHAMI D/O LATE. NARASIMHAPPA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE R/O CHANNAPPA BADAVANE, WARD NO.6 HOLALKERE TOWN AND TALUK CHITDRADURGA DIST. …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 30.04.2026 PASSED ON IA NO. 6 IN OS NO. 116/2022 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT CHANNAGIRI AS PER ANNX-G AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26412 WP No. 16240 of 2026 ORAL ORDER The defendant No.1 in this suit is before this Court questioning the order passed on I.A.No.6 filed under Order VI Rule 17 R/w Section 151 of CPC in O.S.No.116/2022 dated 30.04.2026 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Channagiri. The suit is filed by respondent No.1 herein seeking partition and separate possession of 1/4th share in the suit schedule properties. The petitioner herein is arrayed as defendant No.1 in the said suit. 2. When the matter was posted for further evidence of the defendant, the present application came to be filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking amendment of the pleadings/written statement. By way of the amendment, the petitioner wants to insert the pleading stating that suit schedule properties originally belong to one Puttarangamma and that apart from the suit schedule properties, she owned other properties. It is further contended that all the properties are not included in the present suit and she died leaving behind two sons and three daughters. It is the case that neither the entire properties - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26412 WP No. 16240 of 2026 nor the children of Puttarangamma were not impleaded in the suit. As such, the suit has to be dismissed for non- joinder of proper and necessary parties. 3. In the affidavit filed in support of the application, it is stated that, due to slip of tongue, the defendant has not instructed about the facts involved in the proposed amendment and due to old age, it was not memorized at the time of preparing the written statement. Hence, these facts have to be included. 4. The Trial Court, by the order impugned, had dismissed the said application. While dismissing the application, the Trial Court observed that in the case on hand, the issues are framed by the Court way back on 22.06.2023 and the present application came to be filed on 11.12.2025, when the matter was posted for further evidence of the defendants. The Court further observed that it is settled principle of law that the trial of a suit commences once the issues are framed. In these circumstances, unless the defendants establish that, inspite of due diligence on their part, the proposed amendment could not be sought - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26412 WP No. 16240 of 2026 earlier, the application cannot be allowed. Moreover, the defendants have not produced any documents pertaining to the intending other properties and the legal heirs of the deceased Puttarangamma to show that the said properties and the legal heirs and by way of the proposed amendment, the defendants were trying to introduce a new facts which was not pleaded or disclosed earlier. Hence, the Trial Court has come to the conclusion that the amendment cannot be allowed. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/ defendants submits that the suit is one for partition and separate possession and without impleading the proper and necessary parties and also without including all the properties such a suit cannot be filed and this amendment is very much necessary to decide the dispute between the parties merely on the ground that it is filed at a belated stage cannot be a ground for the Trial Court to dismiss the application. It is submitted that in the interest of justice, the application for amendment has to be allowed. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26412 WP No. 16240 of 2026 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the material on record. 7. The suit is filed in the year 2022 and the issues are framed in the year 2023. The present application seeking amendment of the written statement is filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed only in the year 2025,. This Court has perused the IA that is filed seeking amendment and the affidavit that is filed in support of the application seeking amendment. Except stating the fact that Puttarangamma children have not impleaded as parties to the suit and that some other properties of Puttarangamma have not been included in the suit, no other particulars are stated. It is also not the case of the petitioner that all these facts are not in the notice of the petitioner as on the date. It is only stated that she could not remember those facts and therefore, she could not instruct her counsel to incorporate the same in the written statement. It is not the ground on which the amendment of the pleadings can be permitted. The Trial Court considering all these aspects, has rightly dismissed the application and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26412 WP No. 16240 of 2026 this Court finds no reason to interfere with the well-considered order passed by the Trial Court. Hence, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. ii. Pending IAs., if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE SMC/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16