IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI WRIT PETITION NO.5719 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

SRI DILEEPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O RAMAKRISHNAPPA, CHOWDAPPA COMPOUND, CHOWDESHWARI NAGAR, LAGGERE MAIN ROAD, LAGGERE, BENGALURU-560 058.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI.UMESH.M.N., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SMT.PANKAJA, W/O NAGABUSHAN, D/O RAMAKRISHNAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.8, SADASHIVAIAH LAYOUT, Digitally NEAR GOUTHAM BOOK STORE, signed by KAVYA G THINDU MAIN ROAD, VIDYARARAYA POST, BANGALORE-560 097.

Location:

High Court of Karnataka 2. SRI.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY @ RAMAKRISHNAPPA, S/O LATE CHOWDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, CHOWDAPPA COMPOUND CHOWDESHWARI NAGAR, LAGGERE MAIN ROAD, LAGGERE, BANGALORE-560 058.

3. SRI.H.P.KRISHNASHETTI, S/O H.V.PUTTAIAHA SHETTI, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NO.10/8, 14^TH MAIN, SUBRAMANYANAGARA, BANGALORE-560 021. 4. SMT.RENUKAMMA, W/O SIDDALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.25/A, (C.M.C 541/A) 3^RD F CROSS, CHOWDESHWARI NAGAR, LAGGERE, PEENYA POST, BANGALORE-560 058.

5. SRI.PARAMESH, S/O MALLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT H.B.SHETTAHALLI VILLAGE, YADIYUR HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 142.

6. SRI.CHANDRAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, S/O S.B.GUDDAIAH, R/AT NO.91/81, 1^ST CROSS, 2^ND MAIN ROAD, ANNAPOORNESHWARI LAYOUT, R.H.C.LAYOUT, NAGARABHAVI, BANGALORE-560 072.

7. SRI.ESHWARACHARI, S/O SRI. SHYAMACHAR, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NO.425, 5^TH CROSS, BEHIND KANTHAPPA BUILDING, CHOWDESHWARINAGARA, BENGALURU-560 058.

…RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING ISSUE A WRIT, DIRECTION OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF (A) CERTIORARI SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28.07.2025 PASSED ON INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6 FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 151 CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, SEEKING DIRECTION TO RESPONDENT NO.1 TO ADD THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY TO THE PLAINT SCHEDULE IN O.S.NO. 8097/2019 PENDING BEFORE THE XX CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-32), BENGALURU, VIDE ANNEXURE-E WHEREBY THE TRIAL COURT HAS DISMISSED THE SAID APPLICATION AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAID APPLICATION ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI

ORAL ORDER

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.

2. In a suit for partition filed by the plaintiff/

respondent No.1, the petitioner who is defendant No.2, has mentioned in his written statement regarding property bearing Site No.12 being part of the property in respect of which property, partition ought to be effected. In furtherance thereto an application for amendment bearing I.A.No.6 was filed seeking for a direction to the plaintiff to include Item No.5 to the plaint schedule. Item No.5 is a piece and parcel of Site No.12.

3. By means of the impugned order, the application has been rejected holding that the inclusion of an additional property in the plaint schedule effectively amounts to amending the plaint which can only be done by the plaintiff. The Court held that defendant No.2 is at liberty to assert his claim over the said property in his written statement and seek appropriate reliefs by way of counter claim if so advised.

4. In a suit for partition, though the defendants are arrayed as such, however all parties may be interested in partition of the suit schedule properties. Therefore rejection of the application prima-facie does not appear to be proper. 5. In the objection filed by the plaintiff to the aforesaid IA, it is stated as follows:

“Plaintiff begs to file the following objections to the application filed by the Defendant No.2 U/s 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure

1. It is submitted that the above application lack bonafides, bereft of merits, is speculative and requires to be dismissed in limine.

2. It is submitted that the Defendant is misusing and abusing the process of this Hon'ble Court.

3. It is submitted that in the above case, the 1^st Defendant has filed a det