A 3 { 'K.h_azi_ Abu y|5ay_eem,
AItha7ffV__Adead by his L.Rs.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 6?" DAY OF DECEMBER, 20;
BEFORE
THE HON'E5LE MR. JUSTICE A.N.vEAIuGOPA-EA.:TQOWDIA E' 1'
WRIT PETITION No.52/2O10»_'fGé4§C»§C:j
BETWEEN:
The Town Panchayath,
Gubbh
Tumkur District, -_
Represented by its Chief Off_i'ce'r~,..*
D.Rangaswamy. A 2 A '-
. A y PETITIONER
(By Sri M.Sj\{aVlj§av,::";£'xd':d'E)
""" , .
1. Kha2;i...AAbu saée'd'-fr _
Aged about 63,yea'rs.
2. Khafzi Abua"S.a_:VIehaE',
Aged about 61-y.ea__rs.
"Aged ,§1'bQU'f "55_i..yea rs,
~.A'iE..Vare sO.'n.s'Of Late Khazi
Abdul Khuddus.
a) rmohaseena
W/O. late Althaff,
Aged about 43 years.
b) Sumaiah, D/o.L,ate Althaff,
Aged about 25 years.
C) Kazi Amzad, D/o. late Althaff,
Aged about 22 years.
d) Salma Banu, D/o. Late Althaff;
Aged about 18 years. ' 3
All are residents of poor "house Ac-olony,"._v
Bombay Building Road,
9"' Cross, Tumkur.
5. Reshma,
Aged about 32 years.__ V
6. Macithivarfi A
Aged abeut"~3_G'l.y_e'ars,_: '
Re5l3ondL°._ht5T S: & 6 ar._é'*Cf* '. it
Resic_li.n.g _a't..yG'u'bb_i..To.wn_,'
I *1 RESPONDENTS
(By Sri Hll\l,Shas’h’idVh’ara.,lietrééitesvy & Co., Advs. for R1 to
R3, R4_(a) and RS;._}_
R4(b){c)(:l) are”‘3.e”rved)v
_ V”i”T.hiLi:’writ.__petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227
l’V..o’f,th’e.Co.,nstitutic-.n of India, praying to call for the records
andrquas-h:”‘t.h_e .o’rd”er passed by learned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.)
81 ‘JMAFC, Gubbi, on I.A.NO.3l in O.S.NO.6/2008 dated
2 7.112005 under Annexure ~ K.
n .–_.j’his” petition coming on for preliminary hearing in ‘B’
‘ “grou_p this day, the Court made the following:~
amendment shall not relate back to the date of filing of the
suit, but shall be effective from the date I.A.31 was–«filed,
so that, the bar of limitation raised by the defentlant,:’–c,:avvn
be made an issue, tried and the suit decided.
8. It is settled position of law ,thAaft,u’–at:4.t’he4’t»ime«ref.’
allowing or refusing to amend the p’i’a_i_rtt, it ies”‘V’njot_opel;1 to
the Court to decide the merit, ‘whi’ch_can”onlVj/’be gone into
and decided at the timebf decisiovn~.of._the_ suit. A party is
entitled to plead and prgye .hisiieai,gse./\.,,,,Tiéeaefendant shall
have the oppo:,rt’u’n,ity of”–.filling”;ad’d.iti’on’a!««Vwritten statement.
Consider~ing.,’,\Vth.e .’:atnen*d.Ved’ pleaaing and the additional
written vlstatementflfe,anfiessupes. arise for consideration, the
same will heye~.toV’ beKrai’:..eld, including the one relating to
‘bar_of.,lirnitavtion,””the__.arnendment being effective only from
V7__thé,e”datev._l’;A,V’3.i”was filed in the Court i.e., on 14.9.2009.
proposed amendment does not totally alter
gfrarlnving of the suit. The proposed amendment would
enable” the Court to adjudicate the real question in
Vl”eV.c.ontroversy between the parties and would avoid
K
multiplicity of proceedings. The Trial Court in exercise of
the discretion vested in it, has permitted the amendment.
The Trial Court has not acted irrationally or ili’eVg’a:l’l’yr’in
allowing I.A.31. However, it ought to
condition that, the amendment shalibe,efi§,ecti’,yé–‘I.o_nl’y.fiéom
the date the aifiiblication was filed. ‘
In the said View of the noV”‘i’nte’rrFerenEce in the
matter of allowing of’ca:.l._led’~–for. petition
stands disposed of making it relief prayed
vide I.A.31 shai’l”hVge–effectlgve~’:fro~rn”‘-i4..§3..:’,0O9 and shall not
relate baciiéll dé*te§,,,”or.’j,fiiir.:ig”tor the suit. The
respondents shall’fincorpoifitel the proposed amendment, if
not alread’y._incorwporatedlfin the plaint, within a period 2
weeks’ from tod’ay..__Q_n,a copy of the amended plaint being
fAurn.i5¢r-ed=.tomthe learned counsel appearing for the
3 weeks there from, additional written
–Vstate4rneht “shall be filed. The Trial Court shall raise
‘igadd’iiti_ona’l issues, if any, including the one relating to bar
-ff;oi’-Zlimiitation within a period of 2 weeks from the date the
additional written statement is filed by the defendant. The
/.