- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34490 W.P. No.12407/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.12407/2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: H. BALACHANDRA S/O H. SHIVAPPA HINDU, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS PROP: SRI MAHASTHI RICE AND FLOUR MILL MASUR ROAD, SHIKARIPURA TOWN - 577427. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. G. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADV.,) AND: 1. SMT. RAJESHWARI W/O LATE H. RAVISHANKAR HINDU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS. 2. H.R. ROHINI D/O LATE H. RAVISHANKAR HINDU, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS. 3. H.R. ANUSHYA D/O LATE H. RAVISHANKAR HINDU, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS. 4. H.R. TEJASWINI W/O LATE H. RAVISHANKAR HINDU, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS. MINOR GUARDIAN MOTHER SMT. RAJESHWARI W/O LATE H. RAVISHANKAR. Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34490 W.P. No.12407/2022 R1 TO R4 ARE R/O MANDIPETE SHIKARIPURA TOWN – 577427 SHIVAMOGGA DIST. 5. DR. H. CHANNAPA SWAMY S/O H. MAHALINGAPPA HINDU, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS VIJAYA CLINIC MATHIKERE MAIN ROAD YESHWANTHPURA, BENGALURU - 560022. 6. SMT. SHOBA DEVI P. KADAGI D/O H. MAHALINGAPPA HINDU, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS C/O G B HUBLEPPANAVAR LIG 99/9A, HUDCO COLONY SADHANA KERI DHARWADA - 560037. 7. H.P. CHETHAN S/O PARASHURAMAPPA HINDU, MAJOR, LECTURER GOVERNMENT 1ST GRADE COLLEGE SHIKARIPURA TOWN - 577427. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GANESHA R, ADV., FOR R1 TO R4 SRI. S.V. PRAKASH, ADV., FOR R7 R5, R6 SERVED) - - - THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD.04.04.2022 ON IA NO.7 IN O.S.NO.211/2016 ON THE FILE OF 2ND ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC SHIKARIPURA PRODUCED AT ANNEUXRE-A & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34490 W.P. No.12407/2022 ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 04.04.2022 passed on I.A.No.7 in O.S.No.211/2016 by the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Shikaripura (for short, ‘the Trial Court’). 2. Heard Sri.G.Balakrishna Shastry, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Ganesh R., learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri.S.V.Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.7. 3. The plaintiff filed a suit for injunction against the respondent Nos.1 to 7. In the said suit, it is averred with regard to the flow of title and how the plaintiff became the owner and got into possession of the property. The defendant No.6 has admitted the ownership and possession in his written statement at paragraphs 2 to 4. The defendant No.7 has denied the ownership of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property. When things - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34490 W.P. No.12407/2022 stood thus, the petitioner-plaintiff, as an abundant caution filed an application in I.A.No.7 under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘the CPC’) seeking incorporation of an additional prayer for declaration of title. The Trial Court, by considering the objection of the defendants rejected the said application on the ground that the written statements is filed in the year 2017 and the present application is filed after more than 3 years from the date of filing of the written statements and that the prayer for declaration is barred by limitation. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner-plaintiff has pleaded his title over the suit schedule property as an abundant caution and the relief is sought though the defendants have not categorically denied the title. 4. Be that as it may, taking note of the averments made in the plaint as well as the written statement filed by the defendants, I am of the view that the issue with regard to the aspect of limitation for an additional relief of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34490 W.P. No.12407/2022 declaration is required to be considered by the Trial Court along with the main matter. In my considered view, the writ petition deserves to be allowed by permitting the defendants to file the additional written statement raising the defence of limitation. 5. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 04.04.2022 passed on I.A.No.7 by the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Shikaripura, is set aside. Consequently, I.A.No.7 filed by the plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the CPC, seeking amendment of the plaint, is allowed. (iii) The plaintiff shall file the amended plaint within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34490 W.P. No.12407/2022 (iv) The defendants are permitted to file additional written statement, if any, including the ground of limitation. (v) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the aspect of limitation in the present proceedings. No order as to costs. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37