Rajesh Bindal, J.

1. Vide impugned order1 passed by the High Court2, an application filed by respondents No. 1 and 2/plaintiffs for amendment of the plaint was allowed subject to costs of ₹2,000/-.

2. Briefly, the facts available on record are that respondents No.

1 and 2 filed a suit3 for partition of the ancestral property belonging to their grand father pleading that no actual partition of the property has 1 Order dated 18.08.2010 passed in W.P. No. 82086 of 2010 2 High Court of Karnataka, Circuit Bench at Gulbarga 3 Original Suit No. 151 of 2005 Digitally signed by Dr.

Naveen Rawal Date: 2024.02.29 16:04:04 IST Reason:

Signature Not Verified ever taken place. When the suit was at the fag end, an application was filed by respondents No. 1 and 2 seeking amendment of the plaint. The amendment sought was to add prayer in the suit for a declaration that an earlier compromise decree dated 14.10.2004 was null and void. As prayer was not made earlier, the court fee required thereon was also sought to be affixed. The ground on which the amendment was sought was that due to oversight and mistake, the respondents No. 1 and 2/plaintiffs were unable to seek the relief of decl