- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1215 WP No. 29957 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO.29957 OF 2024 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SMT. KALAVATHI, D/O. GANAPATHYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT MALALAGADDE VILLAGE, MALALAGADDE POST, SORABA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577434. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. LIKITH R.P., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. KUMARASWAMY H.V., S/O. VEERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.12, 1ST MAIN ROAD, RAGHAVENDRA LAYOUT, KAMMAGONDANAHALLI, JALAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 015. Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1215 WP No. 29957 of 2024 ALSO AT: NO.2, 5TH FLOOR, MAHAVIR SHOPPING COMPLEX, OLD KIDS KEMP BUILDING, KG ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P.B. UMESH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. R.B. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 16.10.2024 AS PER ANNEXURE-F ALLOWING I.A.NO.12 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE RESPONDENT HEREIN AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE SAID APPLICATION IN M.C. NO.5648/2017 ON THE FILE OF HONBLE PRINCIPAL FAMILY JUDGE, BANGALORE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PART HEARD, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1215 WP No. 29957 of 2024 ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed questioning the order passed in I.A.No.12 in M.C.No.5648/2017 dated 16.10.2024 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, whereby the Family Court had allowed the application filed by the husband. 2. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience. 3. It is the case that the respondent/husband had filed M.C.No.5648/2017 seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty. Earlier on 22.09.2018 the Family Court had allowed the I.A. that is filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC seeking amendment of the pleadings where the respondent/husband wanted to amend the pleadings with regard to the cause of action that had take place subsequent to filing of the petition. The same was allowed and the respondent/husband had brought on record the FIR and other particulars. Thereafter, the trial commenced. After the trial concluded and the matter was posted for arguments, at that point of time, the respondent/husband had come with the application under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC seeking amendment of the pleadings stating - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1215 WP No. 29957 of 2024 that the cause of action arose for filing the petition the day when the FIR was registered. The Family Court had allowed the application on the ground that already the pleadings are on record, no prejudice would be caused to the wife and allowed the application. Aggrieved thereby, the wife is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife submits that to fill up the latches, the present application is filed as the cause of action as stated earlier does not disclose the correct cause of action as such the present application is filed. It is submitted that during the course of cross examination the petitioner/wife could elicit from the respondent/husband that he has filed the criminal case as the wife had not accepted for the divorce. It is further submitted that the cause of action cannot be altered at this stage. Earlier I.A. was allowed on 22.09.2018, whereby the Family Court had permitted the respondent/husband to bring all the facts pertaining to FIR and other aspects, that cannot be the ground to amend the cause of action. It is further submitted that the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1215 WP No. 29957 of 2024 Family Court, without any basis had allowed the application and the order impugned needs to be set aside. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/ husband submits that all the facts pertaining to the FIR and other things were brought on record on 22.09.2018 itself, the petitioner/wife has no compliant and that order had attained finality. At this stage, it is not open for the petitioner/wife to raise all these grounds. It is submitted that the amendment of pleadings has to be allowed and the Family Court had rightly observed that no prejudice would be caused to the petitioner/ wife as the facts are already on record and only by virtue of this amendment the respondent/husband wants to amend the cause of action. It is further submitted that there are no grounds to interfere with the well considered order passed by the Family Court and the writ petition has to be dismissed. It is further submitted that even the subsequent action can be the cause of action and the Family Court was right in allowing the application, otherwise it would lead to multiple proceedings. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. The husband had filed the M.C. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1215 WP No. 29957 of 2024 in the year 2017 seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty and in the year 2018, the husband has given the complaint against the wife. Those facts he wants to place on record, then he filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC in the year 2018, that application was allowed and all those facts were brought on record. Now, on 27.03.2024 the matter was posted for arguments then on 05.08.2024, the present application is filed whereby the husband wants to amend the cause of action. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner/wife, as the wife could elicit in the cross examination that the complaint is filed, as the wife has not accepted for divorce and there is no specific cause of action, the present application is filed. According to the husband, even the subsequent events would be part of cause of action and also to avoid multiplicity of proceedings. This Court is not able to appreciate the submission made on behalf of the respondent/husband. When he had filed the petition under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC in the year 2017, he wanted certain subsequent facts to be placed on record. Just because subsequent facts are brought on record, cause of action for filing the M.C. as on 2017 cannot be altered. The petitioner by way of this application propose to fill the latches - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1215 WP No. 29957 of 2024 on the part of the husband. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the Family Court without considering all these facts had allowed the I.A. Hence, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. The impugned order passed in I.A.No.12 in M.C.No.5648/2017 dated 16.10.2024 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru is set aside. ii. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. iii. This M.C. is of the year 2017 and the same shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible, but not later than 30.03.2026. iv. All I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32