'Mysore Fafuk. """ "
E By TE IIE'a.:a n a S h a rma , Ad v .)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 28"' DAY OF DECEMBER, 2oIoT':""»T.
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE mu. vENuGoPALAV:A'e.QIfi1.I3A_ E'
WRIT PETITION
BETWEEN:
1. Sri Siddarame Gowda,
Aged about 57 years,
S/o. Sri Mancbegovv¢'fa...A_
2. Sri S.Kumar, .
Aged about 3.1- years;"
S/o. Sri Sid~vd'a'Ea_"rnegowda;"
3. Sri fS.MahjAu}_ _ .4
Aged' about 28'fyears; A
S/0. Sri Sidd'aVra'ITj'egO~w'Ci'a5'
Aliare re'Sid_:E'ng..at GaIT§ra|achatra
V.i_%!fiIage,. Ilawai»--.aAHobli,
PETITIONERS
AND;
Smt._Sharada,
* VTA.ged'"about 38 years
Sri K.Seetharamu,
Residing at Gangraiachatra
Viliage, Ilawala Hobii,
' Mysore Taluk.
I3»)
2. Sri iciL1c1Vi;iVci>11_ Olga new case and tak.i.r1g away the
0 'defence;"--iywhiciii "will Cause 1'e'udice to the
defends = 0
0n «b.a__si:«. of existing pleading, the petitioner
iseekingan.add_itional relief and substitution of a word in
theyé.p--rayer'é-'coltinin. The amendment proposed reads as
gfollov\is
00 ..'.fI)<3ti]2:1'wd21 81 Pl211'ni,i£.'f in favour of 15*'-
del'e1i1da11t rel.a11'ng to plain! sche.du1e property is
ljgifl
W;
esseiitietliy £1 docttniem of Mortgage of Condtionai
5321162".
(21) to cieiete the wot'ci Tevsale' in p1'Ely€'I' (}HC')i'"c}.Ii1'i'}"'af23tv.V}'V
and to ineo1'p0i'a'te the same with 'Re--Qo*r1\rey;a:§i'(:e7}L": "
4. Heard the learned coLins'e'i"«:>n ".both_fiVsin'es'andni
perused the writ papers.
5. Rule 17 of Order empowerisivthetvvfcourt to
permit amendment of of proceeding.
However, the _proviso.. certain
restriction. 'permitted if it is
established V:di'i'ige:,nce the party could not
have raised. the commencement of trial
and if the"prolposxed required for deciding the reai
ques,tq§on in con'tro,iiersy: between the parties i.e., to avoid
in 'proceedings.
petitioner has sought additional reiief on
basis":of the existing pleading. If a party can seek
the basis of the existing pleading, there cannot be
prejudice to the opponent. In certain circumstances,
If"
in order to minimize the litigation, if the party is entitled to
a particular relief, which has not been specifically prayed,
the court in the interests of justice moulds the:w"*i'--e.lief__;__:'
the circumstances, there is no introduction,¢f._an.y new"
case muchless causing any surprise to the i*,esvpo'n.d»ent,s_._'
The defendants have not yet _cross=--e>'{amined~"--l.PW--Ai.
respondents have the opportun'ity"to_ filev"'add'itiona'l§ vilritten
statement. If any additional consvilderation,
the same can be raised.’ injustice or
prejudice of an be inflicted upon
the responéients’_.byylbiJe:rndistti’ragjr th:e”‘incorporation of the
p ro posed a~.mendVri”i:’e.nt. ‘
_7_.V Fi’oVmvtt;–el’peVru.sal of the pleadings, to decide
,.,the’-real2,.que’stion in”c’o’ntroversy between the parties and to
proceedings, the amendment proposed
i.e.’,.__for subisfiitution of a word in the prayer column and
ll’-.,_*.i,ncorpor,a_tiion of additional prayer, can be permitted, by
‘lc1_ir.e,c’tiA_ng the plaintiff to pay compensatory cost to the
K”–fillldeyfendants i.e., for causing delay in disposal of the suit.
6
The trial court on account of a misdirection adopted,
without considering LA No.6 in the correct perspective”,:’h:a3
passed the impugned order, which is irrational.–jr’
In the result, the writ peti’LfAion:.,is,fj.aliowe”d—.and..___’_tlhef
impugned order stands quashed. filled
stands allowed. The plaintiff is’p’e~Vr_niittedVto. i’,_rjcorpo;rate the
proposed amendment’i;n””the 1OV.lZl1,x2O11 by
depositing or paying cost Lfendants,
in the trial coi;_j’rt’§’:;wT,i.:1Ve’cf-efen’dlan:ts::Va:reentitled to file their
additional l’;er;,v’with’in 15 days from the
date is served on the
defendants” orVtheir»Ailjeairrzeidradvocates. Additional issues,
including the””baVr of..’!im’i-tation, if any, shall be raised within
‘-thre’-e..’we,e~.ks”i-from ‘thédate the additional written statement
“i_s”fi!’_ed».l’tr.i:a’i, court is directed to decide the suit as
earlyéplas praictlcable and at any event, within a period of 8
‘months’ from the date the suit is posted for trial.
The plaintiffs shall adduce and complete their side of
T ‘evidence within two months from the date the suit is
2
posted for their side of evidence and the defendants shali
adduce and compiete their side of evidence withinnthree
months frem the date the plaintiffs close theAi.r”:si’d:ej–.:d§
evidence. The trial court shail hear the ”
decide the suit within the aforesaid-‘|i)’er*£–9d.
§<s3'/-