- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010272852021 NC: 2026:KHC:41983 WP No. 14006 of 2021 C/W WP No. 54124 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 14006 OF 2021 (GM-CPC) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 54124 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) IN WP No. 14006/2021 BETWEEN: SRI KRISHNASWAMY S/O LATE CHINNA MUNISWAMY CHETTY AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, NO.72/1 SUDHAMANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 027 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BAYYA REDDY N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI BHUMI REDDY S/O LATE NARASA REDDY AGED MAJOR TARALU VILLAGE KAGGALIPURA HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK 2. SRI KRISHNAMURTHY S/O LATE HULIKUNTE VEERANNA MAJOR, NO.47 SHANKAR MUTT ROAD BDA APARTMENT, NANDI GARDEN BENGALURU-560 004 Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010272852021 NC: 2026:KHC:41983 WP No. 14006 of 2021 C/W WP No. 54124 of 2018 3A. SMT LALITHA VENUGOPAL W/O VENUGOPAL SINCE DECEASED BY LRS SURAN VENUGOPAL S/O LALITHA VENUGOPAL AND VENUGOPAL AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 3B. NAREN VENUGOPAL S/O LALITHA VENUGOPAL AND VENUGOPAL AGED 56 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/O NO.14 GEETHA COLONY, 4TH BLOCK JAYANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 011 4. SARBHOMA NAGAR RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION NO.137, 4TH CROSS SARBHOMANAGAR BILEKAHALLI BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 076 BY ITS SECRETARY RAMAKRISHNA ADIGA …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHANKARANARAYANA BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R4 NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 IS DISPENSED WITH SRI. B.G. SRIRAM, ADVOCATE FOR R3(A AND B)) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS QUASH THE ORDER DATED ON 22.04.2021 ON - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010272852021 NC: 2026:KHC:41983 WP No. 14006 of 2021 C/W WP No. 54124 of 2018 I.A.26 AND 27 IN O.S.2043 OF 2002 PASSED BY THE LEARNED THE XIV ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU CCH-28 (ANNEXURE-D) AND ETC., IN WP NO. 54124/2018 BETWEEN: 1. SRI M KRISHNASWAMY S/O CHINNA MUNISWAMY CHETTY, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/AT NO 72/1, SUDHAMANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 004 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. BAYYA REDDY N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI BHUMI REDDY S/O LATE NARASA REDDY, AGE BY MAJOR, TARALU VILLAGE KAGGALIPURA HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK 2. SRI KRISHNA MURTHY S/O LATE HULIKUNTE VEERANNA AGE BY MAJOR, R/AT NO 47, SHANKAR MUTT ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 004 SMT LALITHA VENUGOPAL SINCE DEAD BY LRS - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010272852021 NC: 2026:KHC:41983 WP No. 14006 of 2021 C/W WP No. 54124 of 2018 3A. SRI SURN VENUGOPAL S/O LATE SMT. LALITHA VENUGOPAL AND LATE VENUGOPAL AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 3B. SRI NAREN VENUGOPAL S/O LATE SMT LALITHA VENUGOPAL AND LATE VENUGOPAL AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS BOTH ARERESIDING AT NO 14, GEETHA COLONY, 4TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 004 4. SARBHOMA NAGAR RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION NO.137, 4TH CROSS, SARBHOMANAGAR BELEKAHALLI VILLAGE B G ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 076 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N. SHANKARANARAYANA BHAT, ADVOCATE SRI. B.G. SRIRAM, ADVOCATE FOR R3(A AND B) NOTICE IS DISPENSED WITH R2 VIDE ORDER DATED 14.03.2019 NOTICE IS DISPENSED WITH - R1) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED ON I.A.NO.20 FILED UNDER ORDER VI RULE 17 OF CPC IN O.S.NO.2043 OF 2002 DATED 29.10.2018 VIDE ANNX-E AND PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNX-B. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010272852021 NC: 2026:KHC:41983 WP No. 14006 of 2021 C/W WP No. 54124 of 2018 THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER W.P.No.54124/2018 is filed challenging the order dated 29.10.2018 passed on I.A.No.20 in O.S.No.2043/2002 on the file of the XIV Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-28) (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’ for short). 2. W.P.No.14006/2021 is filed challenging the order dated 22.04.2021 passed on I.A.Nos.26 and 27 in O.S.No.2043/2002 on the file of the XIV Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-28). 3. Heard Sri Bayya Reddy N., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.G. Sriram, learned counsel for respondent No.3 (A and B), Sri N. Shankaranarayana - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010272852021 NC: 2026:KHC:41983 WP No. 14006 of 2021 C/W WP No. 54124 of 2018 Bhat., learned counsel for respondent No.4, and meticulously perused the material available on record. 4. The petitioner filed O.S.No.2043/2002 against the respondents herein seeking a judgment and decree directing the defendants to deliver vacant possession of the suit schedule property. The suit schedule property is described as land bearing Survey No.139/4 measuring one acre and Survey No.139/5 measuring 32 guntas, situated at Bilekalli Village, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk. 5. In the said suit, the plaintiff filed an application in I.A.No.20 under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, ‘CPC’) seeking amendment of the plaint. The said application was opposed by defendant Nos.3 and 4. The trial Court, under the impugned order dated 29.10.2018, rejected the said application by recording the reasons that the plaintiff intended to add paragraph Nos.8(a) and 8(b) in the plaint, stating the facts that during the pendency of the suit, some of the site owners, who purportedly purchased - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010272852021 NC: 2026:KHC:41983 WP No. 14006 of 2021 C/W WP No. 54124 of 2018 different sites in Survey Nos.139/2 and 139/3, had filed suits in O.S.Nos.8798/2006, 8145/2007, 1697/2010, 124/208, 446/2005, 4409/2005 seeking the reliefs of declaration and permanent injunction, and that some of the said suits came to be ended in compromise while some suits were dismissed on merits. Hence, according to the plaintiff, the said aspects were required to be brought on record. 6. The trial Court recorded the reasons that the plaintiff had not furnished particulars as to who had filed the suits, against whom, for what reliefs and what judgments were passed. It is also observed that the said application, having been filed in the year 2017, was an attempt to fill up the lacuna in the case. 7. It is required to be noticed that, upon rejection of I.A.No.20, the plaintiff filed similar applications ie., I.A.No.26 under Section 151 of CPC seeking to reopen the stage of the suit from arguments to the stage of amendment of pleadings and I.A.No.27 filed under Order - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010272852021 NC: 2026:KHC:41983 WP No. 14006 of 2021 C/W WP No. 54124 of 2018 VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the CPC seeking to amend the plaint after paragraph No.8 and include paragraph No.8(a). The trial Court, vide order dated 22.04.2021, rejected both the applications on costs. 8. It is further required to be noticed that the proposed amendment sought by the plaintiff pertains to suits stated to have been filed by some of the site owners. However, the proposed amendment does not indicate who those persons are, who filed those suits, the site numbers involved, whether those sites are carved out of the suit schedule property, and what is the outcome of the said suits. In the absence of such particulars in the pleadings, and its relevance to the dispute in question, in my considered view, the amendment sought at the stage when the matter is posted for final arguments cannot be allowed. 9. The affidavits accompanying the applications seeking for amendment in both sets of applications do not disclose any cause or reason as to why the proposed - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010272852021 NC: 2026:KHC:41983 WP No. 14006 of 2021 C/W WP No. 54124 of 2018 amendment is necessary for deciding the suit. Admittedly, the suit is one for possession. Hence, the outcome of other proceedings may not have any bearing on the present proceedings. The trial Court, therefore, rightly rejected the applications filed by the plaintiff. I do not find any good ground to interfere with the impugned orders. 10. The writ petitions are devoid of merits and the same are rejected. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE SHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20