IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 4606 OF 2022 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

SRI LALCHAND BANSALI S/O SRI SOHANLAL BANSALI AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS R/O NEAR SIPANI SAWMILL GAVVANAHALLI, RAMPURA POST CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK - 577 101.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI N.R. RAVI KUMAR, ADV., SRI K.S. GANESHA, ADV.)

AND:

SRI LATE B.T. VENKATESH BY LRS

1. SMT. PUTTALAKSHMI W/O LATE B.T. VENKATSHA Digitally signed by NANDINI M 54 YEARS.

S Location: HIGH 2. SRI B.V. KESHAVA COURT OF S/O LATE B.T. VENKATESHA KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESIDING AT CHENNAKESHAVA NAGARA, SAKALESHPURA ROAD BELURU TOWN, PIN - 573 115.

3. SMT. B.T. SHESHAMMA S/O LATE THIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS AGRICULTURIST AND COOLIE WORK, R/AT CHENNAKESHAVA NAGARA SAKALESHPURA ROAD BELURU TOWN PIN 573 115.

4. SRI A.M.BASAVEGOWDA S/O MALLEGOWDA, AGED 78 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST R/O ARADAVALLI, AMBLE HOBLI MUGULUVALLI POST CHIKKAMAGALUURU TALUK PIN-577 101.

5. SMT. SUMA S/O JANARADHANA AGED 53 YEARS R/AT NO.1382, 2ND CROSS NEHRU NAGAR, MANDYA-571401.

6. SRI K.L. BALACHANDRA S/O LATE LAKSHMIPATHI K.A.

AGED 45 YEARS.

7. SRI K.L.GURU S/O LATE LAKSHMIPATHI K.A.

AGED 40 YEARS RESPONDENTS 6 AND 7 ARE R/AT RENUKA NLAYA 1ST CROSS, SHARAVATHINAGARA NEAR NAGAPPA TEMPLE, SHIVAMOGGA PIN-577 201.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAJA L, ADV., FOR R-1 TO R-3 & R-5;

V/O/D 24.05.2022, NOTICE TO R-4, R-6 & R-7 IS D/W)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25.11.2021 PASSED BY THE 2ND ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHIKKAMAGALURU ON I.A.NO.11, FILED UNDER ORDER VI RULE 17 OF CPC, IN O.S.94-2016 ANNEXURE-C TO THE WRIT PETITION.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

1. Defendant no. 1 is before this Court in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to set aside the order dated 25.11.2021, passed in I.A.No.II in O.S.No.94/2016 by the Court of II Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Chikkamagalur.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Respondent nos.1 to 3 herein had filed O.S.

No.94/2016 before the jurisdictional Civil Court at Chikkamagaluru seeking the relief of declaration, possession and permanent injunction in respect of suit schedule property. In the said suit, defendant no.1 had filed his written statement opposing the prayer made in the suit. At the stage of cross- examination of PW1, I.A. No.11 was filed on behalf of defendant no.1 under Order VI Rule 17 CPC with a prayer to permit him to amend his written statement. The said application was opposed by the plaintiffs and the trial Court, vide the order impugned has rejected the said application on the ground that the same was filed after commencement of trial, which is not permissible in view of the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC. Aggrieved by the said order, defendant no.1 is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proposed amendment does not change the cause of action nor the defence earlier taken in the written statement is being withdrawn. Even before the evidence of the defendants was commenced, the present application was filed. Therefore, the trial Court was not justified in rejecting the application.

5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents, who are the plaintiffs before the trial Court has argued in support of the impugned order and submits that in the event this Court is inclined to allow the petition, costs may be imposed on the petitioner and the trial Court may be directed to dispose of the suit expeditiously.

6. The proposed amendment prayed for by defendant no.1 in I.A.No.II reads as follows:

"There is no cause of action or the plaintiff to bring the suit. The alleged cause of action is imaginary one. The suit of the plaintiff is barred by limitation. Since all the