SMT. SAKAMMA v. SRI. B. JAYARAMEGOWDA

SMT. SAKAMMA W/O LATE DALAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS SRI. ANAND S/O LATE DALAPPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS SRI. MANJUNATH S/O LATE DALAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS SRI. SHIVAKUMAR S/O LATE DALAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS SRI. BASAVARAJU S/O LATE DALAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS SRI APPOLI S/O LATE POOJAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT GANGAVARA CHOWDAPPANAHALLI CHANNARAYAPATTANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110. (BY SRI. SHIVASHANKAR K., ADVOCATE) …PETITIONERS Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:2592 WP No. 23879 of 2023 AND:

6. SRI. B. JAYARAMEGOWDA S/O LATE B.M. BYRAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/O GANGAVARA CHOWDAPPANAHALLI CHANNARAYAPATTANA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110. SRI. M. CHANDRA S/O LATE MUNIVENKATASWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RA/T GANGAVARA VILLAGE CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110. SMT. M. NEELAMMA W/O MANJUNATH D/O LATE MUNIVENKATASWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/AT HEMARANAHALLI VILLAGE JANGAMAKOTE HOBLI SHIDLAGHATTA TALUK - 562 110. SMT. M. SAVITHA W/O NANJEGOWDA D/O LATE MUNIVENKATASWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT SONNAHALLIPURA VILLAGE SULIBELE HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110. SRI. SRINIVAS S/O LATE MUNINARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS SRI. RAMESH, S/O LATE MUNINARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS PROPOSED DEFENDANT NOS.4 AND 5 ARE R/AT GANGAVARA VILLAGE CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT – 562 110. (BY SRI. S. MADHUKAR DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-1; R-2 & R-6 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED VIDE ORDER DATED 11.01.2024, NOTICE TO R-3 TO R-5 IS D/W) …RESPONDENTS - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:2592 WP No. 23879 of 2023 THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 3RD ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, DEVANAHALLI DTD 09.10.2023 PASSED IN O.S.NO.243/2017 IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS ON I.A.NO.7 UNDER ORDER 6 RULE 17 R/W SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE VIDE AT ANNEXURE- F. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER This petition is directed against the impugned order dated

09.10.2023 passed in O.S.No.243/2017 by the III Addl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Devanahalli, whereby the application – I.A.No.7 filed by the petitioners – plaintiffs under Order VI Rule 17 CPC seeking amendment of the plaint by incorporating para 6(a) and paragraphs 12(a), 12(b), 12(c) and additional prayer i(a), was rejected by the Trial Court.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for Caveator-respondent No.1 and perused the material on record.

3. The material on record discloses that petitioners – plaintiffs instituted the aforesaid suit against the respondents – defendants for declaration, injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable property. - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:2592 WP No. 23879 of 2023

4. The said suit is being contested by the respondents – defendants. Prior to commencement of trial, the petitioners – plaintiffs moved the instant application seeking amendment to the body of the plaint as well as prayer for declaration. The said application having been opposed by the respondents, the Trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned order rejecting the application mainly on the ground that directions for early disposal had already been issued by this Court in W.P.No.15703/2023 and petitioner was unnecessarily protracting the proceedings. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

5. A perusal of the proposed amendment sought for by the petitioners – plaintiffs will indicate that they merely seek to add / put-forth additional facts and contentions in relation to their claim in the suit. The averments made in the proposed amendment will also indicate that the same is relevant and necessary for adjudication of the issues in controversy between the parties especially having regard to the nature of the suit, which is one for declaration, permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable property. Insofar as additional prayer for - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:2592 WP No. 23879 of 2023 declaration is concerned, is needless to state amendment can be allowed subject to the condition that the same shall not relate back to the date of the suit but shall be reckoned from the date of filing of the application by leaving open the question of limitation, date, etc., to be decided along with other issues in the in the suit.

6. In my considered opinion, the impugned order passed by the Trial Court is not only contrary to the material on record but also to the judgments of the Apex Court in the following cases: (i) Sampath Kumar Vs. Ayyakannu & another – AIR 2002 SC 3369; (ii) L.C. Hanumanthappa Vs. H.B. Shivakumar – (2016) 1 SCC 332; (iii) Rajesh Kumar Aggarwal and others vs. K.K.Modi – AIR 2006 SC 1647; (iv) Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Sanjeev Builders Private Limited – AIR 2022 SC 4256;

7. Under these circumstances and in the light of the judgments of the Apex Court in the aforesaid cases, the impugned order passed by the Trial Court rejecting application – I.A.No.7 has occasioned failure of justice particularly when no prejudice can be - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:2592 WP No. 23879 of 2023 said to have been caused to the petitioners – plaintiffs, who would be entitled to file their additional written statement controverting the contentions / averments put-forth in the amended plaint and as such, the impugned order passed by the Trial Court deserves to be set aside.

8. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) Impugned order dated 09.10.2023 passed on application – I.A.No.7 in O.S.No.243/2017 by the III Addl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Devanahalli, is hereby set aside. (iii) I.A.No.7 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

07.10.2023 i.e., from the date on which I.A.No.7 was filed. (iv) All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter including limitation are kept open and no opinion expressed on the same. - 7 - NC: 2024:KHC:2592 WP No. 23879 of 2023 (v) Liberty is reserved in favour of the respondents to file additional statement. Sd/- JUDGE SV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 92