Karnataka High Court
Mrs Rekha Sangwan vs Ms Vijayalaxmi Hiremath on 7 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:45650
W.P. No.10500/2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
WRIT PETITION NO.10500/2025 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
MRS. REKHA SANGWAN
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
W/O MR. BHUPENDAR SINGH
RESIDING AT V 63, KUMARI OAKVILLE
Digitally ITTANGUR, NEAR THE PRESTIGE CITY
signed by EAST GATE, SARJAPURA, BENGALURU 562125.
RUPA V
Location: ...PETITIONER
High Court
Of (BY SRI. S.V. JOGA RAO, ADV.,)
Karnataka
AND:
1. MS. VIJAYALAXMI HIREMATH
DIRECTOR
INNOVIMA TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD
NO.1371, SRI NIKETHAN, 1ST FLOOR
31ST 'B' CROSS, JAYANAGAR
4TH T BLOCK, BANGALORE 560 041.
2. MR. RAJEEV .H
MANAGING DIRECTOR
INNOVIMA TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD
NO.1371, SRI NIKETHAN, 1ST FLOOR
31ST 'B' CROSS, JAYANAGAR
4TH T BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560 041.
3. MR. GOUTAM
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (C.E.O.)
INNOVIMA TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD
NO.1371, SRI NIKETHAN, 1ST FLOOR
31ST 'B' CROSS, JAYANAGAR
4TH T BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560 041.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:45650
W.P. No.10500/2025
HC-KAR
4. THE MANAGEMENT
INNOVIMA TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD
NO.1371, SRI NIKETHAN, 1ST FLOOR
31ST 'B' CROSS, JAYANAGAR
4TH T BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560 041.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.07.2024
VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN I.A. NO.7 OF O.S.NO.7241/2017. PERMIT THE
PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF TO AMEND THE PLAINT AS PRAYED FOR IN
I.A. NO.7 VIDE ANNEXURE-C IN O.S.NO.7241/2017 & ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
(i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned Order dated 10.07.2024 vide Annexure-A in I.A.No.7 of O.S.No.7241/2017;
(ii) Permit the Petitioner/Plaintiff to amend the Plaint as prayed for in I.A.No.7 vide Annexure- C in O.S.No.7241/2017; and
(iii) Pass such other writ / direction or order as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the interests of justice and equity including the award of the costs of this Petition."-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:45650 W.P. No.10500/2025 HC-KAR
2. Prof.(Dr.)S.V.Joga Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits the petitioner has filed the suit seeking prayer to direct the respondents- defendants to pay a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- towards global compensation and also costs. In the said suit, the petitioner has filed an application seeking amendment of the plaint, which came to be rejected by the trial Court under the impugned order solely on the ground of limitation. It is submitted that the proposed amendment sought is to declare that the termination of the petitioner is illegal and arbitrary and unless the said relief is considered by the trial Court, the same would cause prejudice to the petitioner-plaintiff. It is further submitted that the issue of limitation can be gone into by the trial Court while adjudicating the suit. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of S.Bharathraju v. Sri.G.M.Prakash1 and seeks to allow the application by allowing this petition. 1 2012 SCC OnLine Kar 1420 -4- NC: 2025:KHC:45650 W.P. No.10500/2025 HC-KAR
3. I have heard arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and meticulously perused the material available on record.
4. The petitioner-plaintiff has filed O.S.No.7241/2017 seeking prayer against the respondents-defendants to pay a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- as a global compensation. During the pendency of the said suit, application in I.A.No.7 came to be filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking amendment of the plaint. The proposed amendment sought is to declare that the defendant's termination order of the petitioner-plaintiff as illegal, arbitrary and untenable in the eyes of law and for further relief of damages of Rs.25,00,000/-.
5. The relief of declaration, admittedly is filed after a period of five (05) years of filing the suit. It is to be noticed that the petitioner-plaintiff is terminated from service of the defendants on 02.05.2017 and the relief of -5- NC: 2025:KHC:45650 W.P. No.10500/2025 HC-KAR declaration to declare such termination is bad in law was sought in the year 2023, which is beyond the period of limitation.
6. It is trite law that if the relief sought is barred by limitation, such amendment cannot be allowed. The trial Court considering the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, has recorded a clear finding that the relief of declaration sought in the application is beyond three (03) years and proceeded to reject the application. Hence, I do not find any error in the finding recorded by the trial Court. The judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner has no application to the facts and circumstances of the case. The material on record clearly indicates that the petitioner's termination from services was on 02.05.2017 and application was filed after five (05) years.
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:45650 W.P. No.10500/2025 HC-KAR
7. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly, rejected.
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11