This petition by the plaintiff in O.S.No.316/2020 on the

file of the Senior Civil Judge at Gudibande is directed against

the impugned order passed on I.A.No.4, whereby the said

application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Order VI Rule

17 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking amendment of the

plaint was dismissed by the Trial Court.

The

material

on

record

discloses

that

the

petitioner/plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit against the

respondents/defendants for declaration, permanent injunction

and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable

property.

The

said

suit

is

being

contested

by

the

respondent/defendants.

Prior to the commencement of trial, the petitioner

filed the instant application seeking amendment of the plaint by

- 3 -

incorporating additional prayer and corresponding pleadings in

this regard. The said application having been opposed by the

respondents/defendants, the trial Court proceeded to pass the

impugned order rejecting I.A.No.4, aggrieved by which, the

petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

In my considered opinion, the impugned order passed by the

Trial Court rejecting I.A.No.4 is contrary not only to the

material on record but also to the well-settled principles of law

and the amendment of pleadings as enunciated by the Honb’le

Apex Court in the following judgments:

Sampath Kumar vs. Ayyakannu and Another reported

in AIR 2002 SCC 3369

M/s. Revajeetu Builders and Developers Vs. M/s.

Narayanaswamy & Sons and Others reported in

(2009)10 SCC 848

L.C.Hanumanthappa Vs. H.B. Shivakumar reported in

(2016)1 SCC 332

Life Insurance Corporation Vs. Sanjeev Builders

Private Limited reported in AIR 2022 SC 4256

Rajesh Kumar Aggarwal and Others vs. K.K.Modi &

Others reported in AIR 2006 SC 1647

As can be seen from the aforesaid judgments, in

the event that an amendment WAS opposed on the ground of

limitation, the Hon’ble Apex Court is held that the proposed

amendment shall not relate back to the date of the suit but

- 4 -

shall be reckoned/considered on the date of the application and

the questions/issues regarding limitation would have to be kept

open to be decided by the Trial Court at the time of final

disposal of the suit. Under these circumstances, I am of the

considered opinion that the impugned order passed by the Trial

Court deserves to be set aside and I.A.No.4 deserves to be

allowed subject to certain conditions.

In the result, I pass the following:

ORDER

a.

The petition is hereby allowed.

b.

The impugned order is hereby set aside. I.A.No.4

stands allowed subject to the condition that the

proposed amendment shall not relate back to the

date of the suit but shall be reckoned/considered

from the date of the application, which was filed on

16.04.2022.

c.

Liberty

is

reserved

in

favour

of

the

respondents/defendants to file additional written

statements to the amended plaint and take up all

defences, including the defence of limitation.

- 5 -

d.

All rival contentions on all aspects excluding

limitation etc., are kept open and no opinion is

expressed on the same.

Sd/-

JUDGE

GJM

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38