Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
P. Babu, S/o. Late Padmanabha – Appellant
Versus
Pushpa Bai, W/o. Krishnan – Respondent
ORDER :
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR, J.
Heard Sri H.R.Ananthakrishnamurthy, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri P.N.Hegde, learned counsel for caveator/respondent.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioner-defendant aggrieved by the order dated 18.10.2025 passed on I.A.No.VII in O.S.No.5226/2011 by X Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
3. Parties are referred to as per their status before the trial Court.
4. Brief facts of the case are as under:
The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant to declare that the sale deed dated 31.03.2011 as null and void and not binding on the plaintiff. During the course of the trial, the defendant filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC seeking amendment of the written statement. The said application came to be objected to by the plaintiff. Upon consideration of the said application, the trial Court had rejected the same, which is the subject matter of this petition.
5. It is the vehement contention of learned counsel for the defendant that the impugned order passed by the trial Court is illegal, perverse and arbitrary and the same is liable to be set-aside. It is further contended by the learned counsel for defendant that the
Amendments to pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC allow for alternate defenses like adverse possession, provided they are substantiated in pleadings; courts should be liberal in permitting such a....
A person who has set a title in himself cannot be permitted to alternatively plea perfection of title by adverse possession.
Point of Law : Principles applicable to amendments of plaint are equally applicable to amendments of written statements.
Amendments to pleadings after the commencement of trial are restricted and require demonstration of due diligence to be permitted.
A claim for ownership based on adverse possession requires stringent adherence to pleading and evidentiary standards; mere long possession without clear assertions fails to establish a right.
The Court may allow amendment of pleadings at any stage of the proceedings for just decision of the case and to determine the real questions in controversy between the parties.
The essential ingredients for adverse possession must be pleaded clearly, and long possession alone is not sufficient to establish adverse possession.
Amendments to pleadings must not alter the nature of the suit and must be sought with due diligence, particularly before trial commencement; claims based on adverse possession are limited to a 12-yea....
to approach the Civil Court for adjudicating the title in issue and when the defendant's patta had been cancelled during 1995 merely on the production of certain electricity bills and house tax recei....
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
