IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.51983 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
SRI. RANGAIAH SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS 1 . SMT RATHNAMMA, D/O LATE RANGAIAH, W/O PUTTAMADAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT: BETTADA MADAHALLI VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, GUNDLUPET TALUK - 571 109.
2 . SMT. JAYAMMA, D/O LATE RANGAIAH & W/O BASAVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT: MADAPATTANA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, GUNDLUPET TALUK - 571 109.
3 . SMT. CHINNAMMA, D/O LATE RANGAIAH, W/O CHINNASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT: BEGURU VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, GUNDLUPET TALUK - 571 109.
4 . SMT. MUNIYAMMA, D/O LATE RANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT: KABBALLI VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, GUNDLUPET TALUK - 571 109.
5 . SRI. GOPALA, D/O LATE RANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT: MERALAPURA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, GUNDLUPET TALUK - 571 109.
6 . SRI. SHIVAMURTHY, D/O LATE RANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT: MARALAPURA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, GUNDLUPET TALUK - 571 109.
7 . SRI. SRINIVAS, S/O LATE RANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/AT: HOUSING BOARD COLONY, NANJANGUD TOWN – 571 302.
8 . SRI. CHINNAIAH, S/O LATE GOPALAIAH, AGED ABOUT80 YEARS, 9 . SRI. HANUMAIAH, S/O LATE GOPALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, 10 . SRI. SRIRANGAIAH, S/O LATE GOPALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, PETITIONER NO.8 TO 10 ARE R/AT: MARALAPURA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, GUNDLUPET TALUK – 571 109.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MUNIYAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND:
SRI. CHIKKARANGAIAH, S/O LATE ANKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT: MARALAPURA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI, GUNDLUPET TALUK – 571 109.
... RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 23.10.2019 ON I.A.NO.2 IN RA NO.17/2019 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT GUNDLUPET VIDE ANNEXURE-J; AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner being the defendant in a declaration suit in O.S.No.123/2008, having suffered a judgment & decree has put the same in appeal in R.A.No.17/2019; his application in I.A.No.2 filed under Order VI Rule 17 r/w Section 151 of CPC, 1908, for amending his Written Statement having been rejected by the Lower Appellate Court, he is knocking at the doors of writ court for laying a challenge thereto.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the petition papers, this writ petition being thoroughly devoid of merits, is liable to be rejected because the title suit is of the year 2008; admittedly the father of the petitioner herein had filed the Written Statement years ago; pleadings having thus been complete, issues having been framed, the trial has taken place after drawing of the battle lines; suit also has been disposed off vide judgment & decree dated 23.01.2019.
3. The Apex court in a catena of decisions has deprecated the practice of seeking amendment of pleadings once the trial begins subject to rare exceptions into which the case of the petitioner does not fall; the subject amendment application lacks diligence and bona fide as well and favouring the same offends sense of justice in the absence of plausible explanation.
In the above circumstances, the writ petition is rejected in limine.
Sd/- JUDGE DS