- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302212023 NC: 2026:KHC:42919 WP No. 12874 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 12874 OF 2023 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. M RAMAIAH S/O LATE MUTHARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS RESIDING AT THANISANDRA VILLAGE, KRISHNARAJAPURAM HOBLI, REPRESENTED BY ITS GPA HOLDER PETITIONER NO.2 2. SHRI. SRINIVAS, S/O SRI. M. RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, C/O MOTHER THERESA MEMORIAL SCHOOL, VARONALI, MARGONDANAHALLI ROAD, NEAR RAMAMURTHY NAGAR, BANGALROE - 560 036. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SIDDAPPA V.D., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MITHUN G.A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. S G PANDIT S/O SRI. GAJANANRAO G PANDIT, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT C-01, SHIVA'S RESIDENCY, SHIV NAGAR, GODHANI ROAD, NAGPUR - 440 030 Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302212023 NC: 2026:KHC:42919 WP No. 12874 of 2023 2. G.R. CONSTRUCTIONS, BY ITS DIRECTOR/MANAGER, NO.161/A, TEACHERS COLONY, 1ST MAIN, 7TH CROSS, NEAR DAYANAND SAGAR COLLAGE, KUMARSWAMY LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 078 REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES REGISTRATION ACT 1956 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SAMARTH S. MURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MUNISWAMY GOWDA S.G., ADVOCATE VIDE ORDER DATED 17.03.2026 NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DTD 19.04.2023 PASSED IN OS NO. 25450/2017 BY THE COURT OF THE CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE (CCH-20) AT BANGALORE AS PER ANNX-A1 AND ALLOW THE SAID IA NO. 5 IN OS NO. 25450/2017. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302212023 NC: 2026:KHC:42919 WP No. 12874 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 19.04.2023 passed in O.S.No.25450/2017 by the XXVI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Mayo Hall, Bengaluru (CCH-20) (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial Court' for short). 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the respondents and meticulously perused the material available on record. 3. Respondent No.1 filed a suit in O.S.No.25450/2017 against the petitioners and respondent No.2 seeking the relief of ejectment of defendant Nos.1 to 3 and for delivery of vacant possession of the suit schedule property and other consequential reliefs. In the said suit, defendant Nos.1 and 2 filed a detailed written statement. Thereafter, the matter proceeded further for recording of evidence. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302212023 NC: 2026:KHC:42919 WP No. 12874 of 2023 4. Defendant Nos.1 and 2 filed I.A.No.5 under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking to amend the written statement by inserting new paragraphs as paragraph Nos.6(a) to 6(d), 29(a), 29(b) and 30(a). The said application was opposed by the plaintiff. The trial Court, under the impugned order dated 19.04.2023, rejected the said application. 5. It is to be noticed that, by way of proposed amendment, defendant Nos.1 and 2 intended to bring on record the fact that this Court, vide order dated 27.09.2021 passed in W.P.No.51929/2014, had constituted Justice K.N. Keshavanarayana Committee to investigate various aspects relating to the acquisition of land for the Arkavathi Layout formed by the Bengaluru Development Authority. 6. It is also required to be noticed that the relief sought in the plaint is for ejectment and delivery of possession based on the sale deed executed by defendant No.1 in favour of the plaintiff in the year 1991. The - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010302212023 NC: 2026:KHC:42919 WP No. 12874 of 2023 subsequent constitution of the Committee, headed by a retired Judge of this Court to look into the affairs of the Arkavathi Layout has no bearing on deciding the lis between the parties. 7. The trial Court, taking note of the said aspect, has clearly recorded a finding that the proposed amendment to the written statement has no bearing in deciding the suit for ejectment and possession filed by respondent No.1. I do not find any error in the impugned order calling for interference in the present petition. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is rejected. 9. Consequently, I.A.No.1/2026 stands closed. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE SHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9