Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
N. Chowda Reddy, S/o. Late Narayana Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Nagamma, D/o. Late Narayana Reddy, W/o. N. Chandra Reddy – Respondent
ORDER :
S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
This petition by the defendant No.1 in O.S.No.446/2010 is directed against the impugned order dated 05.11.2025 whereby the application – I.A.No.XVIII filed by the plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 CPC was allowed by the Trial Court.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondent No.1 – plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit against the petitioner – defendant No.1 and other defendants for partition and separate possession of their alleged share in the suit schedule properties and for other reliefs. The suit having been contested by the petitioner – defendant No.1, both sides adduced oral and documentary evidence, at the stage of defendants’ evidence, plaintiff filed the instant application – I.A.No.XVIII seeking permission to amend the plaint by incorporating additional pleadings including additional properties as hereunder:
“Under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code that for the reasons sworn to the accompanying affidavit, the above named plaintiff prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pl
Court allows amendment to plaint for effective adjudication, emphasizing necessity over procedural delay and potential multiplicity of proceedings, while ensuring justice is served.
(1) Amendment of plaint – At stage of amendment, merits or correctness of plea sought to be added is not required to be gone into.(2) Amendment of plaint – Partition suit – Mere delay in filing petit....
Amendments to pleadings in partition suits should be liberally allowed to ensure justice and avoid multiplicity of proceedings, without assessing the merits of the amendment at the initial stage.
Amendments to pleadings should be granted only if they do not prejudice the other party; if the amendment is sought after trial has commenced, due diligence must be established.
Amendments to pleadings may be allowed post-trial if due diligence is demonstrated, and if they do not change the cause of action or result in injustice.
An application to amend the plaint is maintainable even after passing of the preliminary decree, since the suit is not terminated and proceedings are continuous.
The delay in seeking amendment can be compensated by way of costs, and the court can invoke supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside unsustainable orders.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
