- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010368962022 NC: 2026:KHC:36522 W.P. No.16405/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.16405/2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS S/O LATE MADAIAH. 2. SRI. BASAVARAJU AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS S/O LATE MADAIAH. 3. SRI. MADAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O LATE MADAIAH. 4. SRI. NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O LATE MADAIAH. 5. SRI. SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS S/O LATE MADAIAH. 6. SRI. RAJENDRA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS S/O LATE MADAIAH. 7. SRI. BASAVANNA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS S/O LATE MADAIAH. Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010368962022 NC: 2026:KHC:36522 W.P. No.16405/2022 8. SRI. HUCHAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS S/O LATE MADAIAH. 9. SRI. VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS S/O LATE MADAIAH. 10. SRI. MADAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O LATE MADAIAH. PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 10 ARE R/AT. LALITHADRIPURA VILLAGE VARUNA HOBLI MYSURU TALUK AND DISTRICT-570010. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. P. NATARAJU, ADV.,) AND: 1. SMT. CHINNAMMA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS W/O LATE CHIKKANNA. 2. SRI. MAHADEVA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O LATE CHIKKANNA. 3. SRI. NAGANNA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O LATE CHIKKANNA. 4. SRI. KUMARA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS S/O LATE CHIKKANNA. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010368962022 NC: 2026:KHC:36522 W.P. No.16405/2022 5. SRI. KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS S/O LATE CHIKKANNA. 6. SRI. BASAVANNA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS S/O LATE CHIKKANNA. 7. SRI. SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS S/O LATE CHIKKANNA. RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 7 ARE R/AT LALITHADRIPURA VILLAGE VARUNA HOBLI MYSURU TALUK AND DISTRICT-570010. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. CHANDRA KANTH R. GOULAY, ADV., FOR R1, R3, R4, R5, R6 & R7 R2 SERVED) - - - THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED I ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT MYSURU IN O.S.NO.572/2015 ON I.A.NO.8 DATED 04.07.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-E AND MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPLICATION ON IT’S FILE AS PRAYED FOR & 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 - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010368962022 NC: 2026:KHC:36522 W.P. No.16405/2022 ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking for the following relief: “Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing the order passed by the Learned I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM at Mysuru in O.S.No.572/2015 on I.A.No.8 dated 04.07.2022 vide Annexure-E and maybe pleased to allow the application on it’s file as prayed for”. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. 3. The respondent Nos.1 to 7 have filed O.S.No.572/2015 seeking the relief of declaration and permanent injunction. In the said suit, the petitioners are the defendants. They filed a detailed written statement on 26.02.2016. The Trial Court framed the issues, the parties led the evidence and the matter was posted for arguments. At that stage, the defendants filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010368962022 NC: 2026:KHC:36522 W.P. No.16405/2022 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for short ‘CPC’) seeking to amend the written statement. A perusal of the affidavit accompanying the said application indicates that the defendants filed the written statement and by oversight, they could not mention certain facts and that the defendants intend to narrate certain factual matrix. 4. In my considered view, the reasons shown in the affidavit accompanying the application are not sufficient to accept the same and allow the application for amendment of the written statement. It is required to be noticed that the application for amendment of the written statement was filed at the stage when the matter was posted for final arguments. In my considered view, the Trial Court was fully justified in rejecting the application. I do not find any error in the order passed by the Trial Court calling for interference in this petition. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010368962022 NC: 2026:KHC:36522 W.P. No.16405/2022 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is hereby rejected. The amount in deposit shall be returned to the petitioner. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40