- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:273 WP No. 100150 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO.100150 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: K. MAHADEVAPPA S/O. LATE K. REVANASIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. NAGARAKONDA VILLAGE, HARAPANAHALLI TQ, PRESENTLY VIJAYANAGARA DIST, PIN CODE-583131. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. T. BASAVANA GOUD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. KARIYAPPA S/O. BANAKARA HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, 2. NAGAPPA S/O. LATE BANAKAR HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, 3. NARAPPA S/O. LATE BANAKAR HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, 4. KUBHERAPPA S/O. LATE BANAKARA HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 5. MUNIYAPPA S/O. LATE BANAKARA HANUMANTHAPPA, Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:273 WP No. 100150 of 2026 AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, 6. BHEEMAPPA S/O. LATE HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 7. RAMALINGAPPA S/O. LATE HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 8. BASAVARAJA S/O. LATE HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, 9. RENUKAMMA W/O. K. BHARMANAGOUDA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, THE RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 9 ARE ALL R/O. NAGARAKONDA VILLAGE, HAGARIGUDIHALLI POST, HARAPANAHALLI TQ, VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT, PIN CODE-583127. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT IN THE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 06.11.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HARAPANAHALLI, ON APPLICATION NO.13, IN O.S.NO.89/2014, VIDE ANNEXURE-H, WHILE ALLOWING THE PRESENT WRIT PETITION AND ETC.,. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:273 WP No. 100150 of 2026 ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed questioning the order dated 06.11.2025 passed on IA No.13 in OS No.89/2014 by the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Harapanahalli. 2. The petitioner before this Court is the defendant No.2. The mother of respondent Nos.1 to 8 herein has filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction. The suit is filed in the year 2014. In that, defendant No.2 filed IA No. 13 under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC seeking to amend the written statement and the counter claim filed by him. By order impugned, the Trial Court has dismissed the said IA. While dismissing the IA, the Trial Court has observed that the defendant No.2 has pleaded altogether new facts and the amendment is sought in the written statement and the counter claim. The suit was filed in the year 2014 and also the written statement and the counter claim were filed in the year 2014. In the written statement, plea of earlier partition is taken and so also, the defendants have claimed right over half of the suit schedule property. The suit is for declaration and permanent injunction and already evidence is almost completed. When the case was posted for further evidence of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:273 WP No. 100150 of 2026 DW2, this application is filed after 11 years and no reasons are assigned for delay in filing the written statement. The Trial Court observed that the amendment is to introduce new pleadings, which are belated and not tenable. The Trial Court has also discussed the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in that regard. It is also observed that under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC, the Court has powers at any stage of the suit to permit either party to alter or amend the pleadings. However, such amendment must be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties. It is further observed that no such amendment can be allowed after the trial has commenced, unless the Court comes to a conclusion that, in spite of due diligence, the party could not raise the issue before the commencement of trial. But in this case, the amendment that is sought would take away the right already accrued to the adversary and the amendment is also post trial. Accordingly, the Trial Court had dismissed the IA. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/Defendant No.2 submits that the amendment that is sought by the petitioner is very much necessary to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. Even if the amendment is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:273 WP No. 100150 of 2026 allowed, the nature of the suit will not be changed. It is submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court time and again has observed that the Court cannot apply a hyper technical view while allowing the amendments. It is submitted that the amendment sought by the petitioner is only to clarify the existing defence and counter claim pleas and no prejudice will be caused to the other side. He further submits that, the amendment that is sought is necessary to bring on record the necessary facts, which will enable the Court to resolve the disputes between the parties in a better way. The Trial Court without considering all these aspects only on the ground of laches, had dismissed the application and hence, the order impugned needs to be set aside. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, perused the material on record. The suit is filed for declaration and injunction. The suit is of the year 2014. Already, the petitioner has filed the written statement and also filed a counter claim. Now,it is the case of the defendant No.2 that he had a certified copy of the Registered Gift Deed dated 30.07.2020, which is executed by one Banakar Parvathamma in favour of her only daughter by name Banakar Suvarna, who is the wife of plaintiff No.9. The petitioner/defendant No.2 has filed the RTCs - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:273 WP No. 100150 of 2026 of the land bearing Sy.No.256/B to an extent of 3.46 acres and its RTCs of Podi survey numbers and Sy.No.266/B to an extent of 7.20 acres and its RTCs of the Podi Survey numbers, both are situated at Hagarigudihalli village of Chigateri Hobli in Harapanahalli Taluk. The plaintiff Nos.5, 6 and 9 have made some transactions on both the lands from the years 2001 to 2023. But the plaintiffs and the sons of Banakar Basappa and Banakar Channabsappa have not made any transactions on the suit schedule property from the year 1968 till the filing of the suit. Since 45 years, they have been silent on the suit schedule land and the said Banakar Basappa and Banakar Channabasappa were brothers of the said Hanumanthappa. It is stated that the documents filed by the petitioner are corroborative evidence with the documents filed by him already marked i.e. Exs.D1 to D6. Hence, the amendment of the written statement and counter claim is very much necessary. 5. This Court has perused the affidavit that is filed and the amendment that is sought to be and also by way of the amendment, the pleadings that defendant No.2 wants to insert. After the amendment to the CPC, after commencement of the trial, if the IA under Order VI Rule 17 has to be allowed, burden - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:273 WP No. 100150 of 2026 lies on the party, who is seeking amendment, to establish before the Court that in spite of due diligence, these facts could not be brought to the notice of the Court. Admittedly, the documents which the petitioner is referring are of the year 2020. The suit is of the year 2014 and this IA came to be filed on 22.04.2025. Defendant No.2 had filed this application by introducing the new facts and according to him, for the better appreciation of the facts involved in the case, this amendment is necessary. That is not the purport of an application under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC, the Court has rightly observed that by allowing this application, lot of prejudice would be caused to the plaintiffs and it would amount to taking away the valuable rights that are already accrued in favour of one party. 6. Hence, this Court is of the view that the Trial Court has rightly considered all the facts and rightly dismissed the application. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Trial Court. Hence, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is dismissed. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:273 WP No. 100150 of 2026 ii) All I.A.s in this writ petition shall stand closed. Sd/- JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI JTR CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53