Writ Petition No. 4565 of 2021 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:19254 WP No.4565/2021 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.4565 OF 2021 (GM-CPC) Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: High Court of karnataka BETWEEN: 1. SMT. ASIYA K.A. W/O LATE K.A. ASSAINAR AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.
Legal Reasoning
2. SMT. SALMA D/O LATE K.A. ASSAINAR AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS. 3. SMT. NABEESA D/O LATE K.A. ASSAINAR AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. 4. DR. BADASHA S/O LATE K.A. ASSAINAR AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS. ALL ARE R/AT BAVALI VILLAGE PARANE POST, MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU 57212. (BY SRI. ANIKETH, ADV., FOR SRI. SACHIN B.S. ADV.,) AND: 1. P.A. HAMEED S/O LATE P.A. ABDULLA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. …PETITIONERS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:19254 WP No.4565/2021 HC-KAR 2. P.A. ABBAS S/O LATE P.A. ABDULLA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS. 3. P.A. SALAAM S/O LATE P.A. ABDULLA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 4. P.A. HAMSA S/O LATE P.A. ABDULLA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. 5. SMT. FATHIMA W/O MAJEED D/O LATE P.A. ABDULLA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS. 6. SMT. NASEEMA W/O HARRIES D/O LATE P.A. ABDULLA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS. 7. SMT. P.A. AISHA W/O LATE P.A. ABDULLA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS. ALL ARE R/AT BAVALI VILLAGE PARANE POST, MADIKERI TALUK KODAGU 571212. …RESPONDENTS (R1, R2, R4 & R6 ARE SERVED R1 & R6 ARE LRS OF DECEASED R7 STEPS TO BRING LRS OF DECEASED R7 WAIVED V.C.O. DTD:11.08.2021 R3 SERVICE OF NOTICE WAIVED V.C.O. DTD:01.10.2021 R5 SERVICE OF NOTICE IS HELD SUFFICIENT V.C.O. DTD:06.06.2025) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:19254 WP No.4565/2021 HC-KAR THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.03.2020 PASSED ON I.A.NO.16 FILE UNDER ORDER 6 RULE 17 OF CPC IN O.S.NO.22 OF 2015 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE VIRAJPET, AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW I.A.NO.16 AS PRAYED FOR. ISSUE ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION THAT DEEMS FIT TO GRANTS IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs challenging the order dated 16.03.2020 passed on I.A.No.16 in O.S.No.22/2015 by the Principal Civil Judge, Virajpet, wherein the application filed by the plaintiffs under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, came to be dismissed. 2. Heard. 3. Sri.Aniketh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have filed suit against the respondents-defendants for specific performance of the agreement dated 10.07.1986. However, during the course of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:19254 WP No.4565/2021 HC-KAR cross-examination of PW-1, it was noticed by the plaintiffs that there is a mistake crept in the agreement of sale dated 10.07.1986 with regard to the survey number. In the said agreement, the survey number is referred as 38 instead of 138/1. Hence, the plaintiffs have moved an application under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC seeking to amend the plaint to the aforesaid effect. However, the Trial Court erroneously rejected the application on the ground that allowing the application would amount to withdrawal of the admission which would change the nature of the suit and amendment cannot be allowed after framing of the issues. He seeks to allow the petition by permitting the petitioners to amend the plaint. 4. Though notice is served on the respondents, they have remained absent. 5. I have heard the arguments made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and meticulously perused the material on record. 6. The petitioners are the plaintiffs before the Trial Court. They have filed O.S.No.22/2015 against the defendants - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:19254 WP No.4565/2021 HC-KAR for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 10.07.1986 with a further prayer to direct the defendants to execute the sale deed in respect of the suit schedule property and for a permanent injunction against the defendants in respect of the suit schedule property. In the said suit, the respondents entered appearance and filed a counter claim seeking prayer that the alleged agreement of sale dated 10.07.1986 is illegal and is an unenforceable document and also that there was no intention to sell and purchase the suit schedule property. Even otherwise, the sale consideration shown in the agreement is very low and it is a sham document and other prayers. They sought for a declaration that the defendants are the owners of the suit schedule property and also sought for delivery of possession with regard to 0.04 acres of land with small tile house out of 15 cents in Sy.No.138/1 of Bavali Village. The averments made in the counter claim clearly indicate that the understanding of the defendants is also only with regard to Sy.No.138/1 of Bavali Village, hence no prejudice would be caused to defendants by allowing the amendment. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:19254 WP No.4565/2021 HC-KAR 7. Admittedly, the amendment sought by the petitioners is only regarding the change in the pleadings with regard to survey number, which neither alters the nature of the suit nor would withdraw the admissions as observed by the Trial Court. It is always open for the defendants in the suit to cross-examine on the said aspect also. Hence, considering the aforesaid aspect, I am of the considered view that the Trial Court has committed a grave error in rejecting the application for amendment. The application for amendment can be allowed at any stage of the proceedings. 8. Considering the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to pass the following:
Decision
ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 16.03.2020 passed on I.A.No.16 in O.S.No.22/2015 by the Principal Civil Judge, Virajpet, is set aside. (iii) I.A.No.16 is allowed. The petitioner shall file amended plaint within a period of two weeks before the Trial Court. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:19254 WP No.4565/2021 HC-KAR (iv) The defendants are permitted to file written statement to the said amended plaint. (v) Once the amended plaint is filed within two weeks, thereafter the Trial Court shall regulate its proceedings. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8