IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.47043 OF 2017 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
1. SMT.SUJATHA W/O.LATE CHOWDAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 2. KUM.KEERTHANA D/O.LATE CHOWDAPPA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS 3. KUM.KISHORI D/O.LATE CHOWDAPPA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS 4. MR.SUMANTH S/O.LATE CHOWDAPPA AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS R1 TO R4 ARE R/AT LAKSHMIDEVIPURA TUBUGERE HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561 201 5. SMT.NALINI @ NANJAMMA D/O.LATE SUBBARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT RAJAGHATTA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI DODDABALLAPUR TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-561 201 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI H.V.SUBRAMANYA, ADVOCATE) AND:
SMT.MUNILAKSHMAMMA W/O.SRI CHIKKAPAPAIAH AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT TOGARIGHATTA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561 201 (BY SRI PRAKASH T. HEBBAR, ADVOCATE) ... RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATE 03.04.2017 (ANNEXURE-D) PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, DODDABALLAPURA IN OS.NO.391/2015 AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioners being the defendants in a suit for specific performance in O.S.No.391/2015 are knocking at the doors of writ Court for assailing the Order dated 03.04.2017, a copy whereof is at Annexure – D whereby the learned Senior Civil Judge, Doddaballapura, having favoured the respondent-plaintiff’s application in I.A.No.7 filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC, has permitted the amendment of the plaint. After service of notice, the respondent having entered appearance through her counsel, resists the writ petition.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court declines to grant indulgence in the matter for the following reasons:
a) the suit has not much advanced in trial although PW.1 is partly examined; this is a suit for specific performance; the contention which the respondent-plaintiff now wants to add to the plaint by way of amendment is of the recent origin; for due adjudication of the suit, the said amendment will be facilitatory;
b) the petitioners would not be put to much prejudice inasmuch as after filing of the amended plaint, they have other opportunity of filing additional Written Statement to resist the amendment in suit; whatever little prejudice that is occasioned by the subject amendment can be compensated in terms of costs.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition fails; the impugned order is sustained subject to condition that the respondent-plaintiff shall pay a cost of Rs.10,000/- to the petitioners collectively within a period of one month, failing which, the impugned order shall be treated as having been quashed.
It is open to the petitioners to file additional written statement within a period of six weeks.
All contentions of the parties are kept open.
Sd/- JUDGE KTY