- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010439162022 NC: 2026:KHC:43988 WP No. 19019 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 19019 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: MR PUTTA REDDY AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS S/O LATE THAMMANNA (SINCE DEAD REP BY LR'S) 1(A) VINODAMMA W/O LATE PUTTA REDDY YALAGERE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN-562104 1(B) NIRMALA P D/O LATE PUTTA REDDY W/O B.M.SANTOSH NO.16, 6TH CROSS, VIDYARANYAPURA MAIN ROAD, DODDAKALLASANDRA, BENGALURU- 97 1(C) CHANDRASHEKAR Y P S/O LATE PUTTA REDDY YALAGERE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010439162022 NC: 2026:KHC:43988 WP No. 19019 of 2022 CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN-562104 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANTOSH B M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR KONDAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS S/O LATE CHIKKAMARAPPA KALKUNTE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN-562 101 2. MR VENKATARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS S/O LATE CHIKKAMARAPPA KALKUNTE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN-562 101 3. MRS VENKATAMMA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS D/O LATE CHIKKAMARAPPA GOLLU VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN-562101 4. MRS ACHAKKA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS D/O LATE CHIKKAMRAPPA DEVAREDDYPALLI VILLAGE BAGEPALLI TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT -562207 - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010439162022 NC: 2026:KHC:43988 WP No. 19019 of 2022 5. MRS SHIVAMMA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS D/O LATE CHIKKAMARAPPA KAMMADIGANAHALLI VILLAGE HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PIN-562114 6. MR VENKATARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS S/O LATE DODDA AVALAPPA 7. MR VENKATA KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS S/O LATE CHIKKA KONDAPPA @ KONDAPPA 8. MR K SRINIVASA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O LATE CHIKKA KONDAPPA @ KONDAPPA 9. MR VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS W/O LATE CHIKKA MARAPPA 10. MRS VENKATAMMA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS W/O LATE KONDAPPA (SINCE DEAD REP BY LR'S R11 AND R12) 11. MR DODDAVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS S/O LATE KONDAPPA - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010439162022 NC: 2026:KHC:43988 WP No. 19019 of 2022 12. MR CHIKKA VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS S/O LATE KONDAPPA 13. MRS MARAMMA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS W/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA 14. MR MUNIRAJU AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA RESPONDENT NO.6 TO 14 ARE R/AT KALKUNTE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN-562101 15. MRS GANGARATHNAMMA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS D/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA W/O MR RAMAKRISHNAPPA GOLLU VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI CHIKKABALLAUPRA TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN-562101 16. MRS. KAMALA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS D/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA W/O MR. SRINIVASA MURTHY POLICE QUARTERS, GOLLARAHALLI POST SUNKADAKATTE, BENGALURU- 560 091 17. MR. PAPANNA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS S/O LATE VENKATARAYAPPA - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010439162022 NC: 2026:KHC:43988 WP No. 19019 of 2022 KALKUNTE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK & DISTRICT PIN: 562 101 18. MR. RAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS S/O LATE MOTAPPA GOLLU VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK & DISTRICT PIN: 562 101 19. MRS. VENKATARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS S/O LATE PEDDANNA EDDINA THIPPANAHALLI VILLAGE, JANGAMAKOTE HOBLI, SHIDALAGATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT PIN: 562 105 20. MRS. GANGARATHNAMMA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS W/O MR. GANGARAJU D/O LATE CHIKKA KONDAPPA @ KONDAPPA VATADAHOSAHALLI VILLAGE & POST, NAGARAGERE HOBLI, GOURIBIDANUR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT PIN: 561 228 21. MR. KONDAPPA @MAKALKONDAPPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS S/O LATE VENKATARAYAPPA KALKUNTE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK & DISTRICT PIN: 562 101 22. MR. HANUMAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS S/O LATE VENKATARAYAPPA KALKUNTE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010439162022 NC: 2026:KHC:43988 WP No. 19019 of 2022 CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK & DISTRICT PIN: 562 101 23. MRS. UMMEHANI AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS W/O KHADAR ABBAS NO. 17, 5TH MOIN, MODADOHALLI BENGALURU- 560060 24. MR. B.P. GANGAHANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS S/O PAPAIAH MANAGING DIRECTOR UNIQUE TRAINING CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LIMITED. NO.1, RING ROAD, 1ST BLOCK, NAGARABHAVI, 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 072 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRUTHVI RAJ, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. G BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5; SRI. R CHANDRA SHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R7 AND R8; R6, R9, R11, R12, R13, R14,R20, R24 ARE SERVED; V/O DATED 6/6/24, NOTICE TO R8, R15 TO R19, R12 AND R23 IS D/W V/O DTD 6/6/24, NOTICE TO R22 IS H/S, R10 IS DEAD) THIS WP FILED IS UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE FOLLOWING ORDERS DTD 17.08.2022 PASSED BY THE HONBLE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT CHIKKABALLAPURA IN THE SUIT O.S.NO.33/2010 ON THE FOLLOWING I.A.NO.34 AND 35 AT ANNEXURE-A FILED BY THE PLAINTIFF (R1 TO 5 HEREIN). - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010439162022 NC: 2026:KHC:43988 WP No. 19019 of 2022 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 ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 17.08.2022 passed on I.A.Nos.34 and 35 in O.S.No.33/2010 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Chikkaballapura (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial Court' for short). 2. Heard Sri Santhosh B. M, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Pruthviraj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri G. Balakrishna Shastry, learned counsel for Nos.1 to 5, Sri R. Chandra Shekar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.7 and 8 and meticulously perused the material available on record. 3. The father of respondent Nos.1 to 5 filed a suit in O.S.No.33/2010 seeking the relief of partition and - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010439162022 NC: 2026:KHC:43988 WP No. 19019 of 2022 separate possession of the plaint suit schedule properties, sought one-third share and other consequential reliefs. In the said suit, the plaintiff adduced evidence and defendant No.1 was examined. At that stage, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.34 under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'CPC') seeking amendment of the plaint, and I.A.No.35 under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of the CPC seeking to implead proposed defendant Nos.16 and 17 as parties to the suit. 4. The said applications were opposed by proposed defendant No.16. The trial Court, by separate orders dated 17.08.2022, allowed the applications and permitted the plaintiff to amend the plaint and implead proposed defendant Nos.16 and 17 as parties to the suit. 5. The primary contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner, namely proposed defendant No.16 had purchased suit item Nos.28 to 30, under a registered sale deed dated 05.03.1990 executed - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010439162022 NC: 2026:KHC:43988 WP No. 19019 of 2022 by the original plaintiff, Sri Chikka Marappa. It is submitted that the present applicant was also a signatory to the said sale deed as a witness. 6. It is further contended that proposed defendant No.16 is neither a necessary nor a proper party to the suit for partition. It is also contended that the properties in question were purchased in the year 1990. The application to include the said properties in the suit was filed after more than three decades. It is the contention of the petitioner that any relief, if claimed against proposed defendant No.16, would be barred by the law of limitation. 7. It is required to be noticed that the trial Court, under the impugned order, allowed the application for amendment by recording the reasons that the suit filed by the plaintiff was one for partition and separate possession and that all the joint family properties were required to be included in the suit. - 10 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010439162022 NC: 2026:KHC:43988 WP No. 19019 of 2022 8. It is also required to be noticed that the trial Court failed to take note of the fact that the plaintiff had not sought any relief with regard to the sale deed dated 05.03.1990 alleged to have been executed by Sri Chikka Marappa, the original plaintiff, in favour of proposed defendant No.16. In the absence of any such relief, the inclusion of those properties of defendant No.16 in the suit for partition would have no meaning. 9. The trial Court has also failed to appreciate the aspect of delay in filing the applications. It is further required to be noticed that the applications were filed after the commencement of the trial and without any due diligence. The affidavits accompanying the applications seeking amendment and impleadment are bereft of details, and no sufficient cause has been shown. Therefore, the applications, insofar as the petitioner herein is concerned, ought to have been rejected. - 11 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010439162022 NC: 2026:KHC:43988 WP No. 19019 of 2022 10. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER a) The writ petition is allowed. b) The impugned orders dated 17.08.2022 passed on I.A.Nos.34 and 35 filed by the plaintiff insofar as the petitioner herein concerned, are hereby set aside. c) Consequently, I.A.No.34 under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the CPC and I.A.No.35 under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of the CPC insofar as they relate to the petitioner/defendant No.16, stand rejected. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE SHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31