Karnataka High Court
Basamma vs Hampamma on 10 March, 2026
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2251
WP No. 202494 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 202494 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. BASAMMA W/O VEERESHAPPA,
AGE: 71 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., AND HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. KENGAL VILLAGE, TQ. SINDHANUR,
DIST. RAICHUR-584128.
2. K. BASAVARAJ S/O VEERESHAPPA,
AGE:49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O KENGAL VILLAGE, TQ. SINDHANUR,
DIST. RAICHUR-584128.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI MAHANTESH PATIL, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
SWETA KULKARNI
Location: HIGH AND:
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
1. SMT. HAMPAMMA W/O BASAVARAJ,
AGE: 71 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., AND HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. VALABELLARY VILLAGE, TQ. SINDHANUR,
DIST. RAICHUR-584128.
2. SMT. SHANKRAMMA W/O CHANNABASAPPA,
AGE: 85 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. KENGAL VILLAGE, TQ. SINDHANUR,
DIST. RAICHUR-584128.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2251
WP No. 202494 of 2025
HC-KAR
3. GURU BASAVA S/O CHANNABASAPPA,
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. AGALKERA VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. KOPPAL-583231.
4. RUDRESH S/O CHANNABASAPPA,
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. AGALKERA VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. KOPPAL-583231.
5. VISHALAKSHI W/O SHIVARAJ,
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O SOUDI, TQ. RONA,
DIST. GADAG-582101.
6. UDAYAKUMAR S/O CHANNABASAPPA,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O AGALKERA VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. KOPPAL-583231.
7. KUMARI VIDYASHREE D/O CHANNABASAPPA,
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. AGALKERA VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. KOPPAL-583231.
8. CHANDRASHEKHARAPPA
S/O CHANNABASAPPA,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O AGALKERA VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. KOPPAL-583231.
9. SMT. SAVITRI W/O VEERESHAPPA,
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRI., AND HOUSEHOLD,
R/O KANAKAGIRI VILLAGE,
TQ. GANGAVATI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI ARUNKUMAR AMARGUNDAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
V/O DTD. 10.03.2026 NOTICE TO R2 TO R9 IS DISPENSED
WITH)
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2251
WP No. 202494 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A)
SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON I.A NO.16, IN O.S NO.
488/2014 DATED 23-07-2025 (WRONGLY MENTIONED AS 22-
08-2025) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC AT SINDHANUR VIDE ANNEXURE-K AND CONSEQUENTLY
ALLOW THE I.A NO. 16 IN OS NO. 488/2014 FILED BY THE
PETITIONER; B) PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS OR DIRECTIONS
AS THIS COURT DEEMS JUST AND PROPER UNDER THE FACTS
AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ALLOW THIS WRIT
PETITION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
Defendant Nos.3 and 7 are before this Court in this Writ Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to set aside the order dated 23.07.2025 passed on I.A.No.16 in O.S.No.488/2014 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Sindhanur [for brevity, 'the Trial Court'] at Annexure-K. -4- NC: 2026:KHC-K:2251 WP No. 202494 of 2025 HC-KAR
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Respondent No.1 herein has filed O.S.No.488/2014 before the jurisdictional civil court at Sindhanur seeking the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties. When the suit was at the stage of further examination-in-chief of PW-1, defendant Nos.3 and 7 had filed I.A.No.16 under Order 8 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of CPC with a prayer to permit them to file their written statement. Said application was filed on 21.07.2025. The plaintiff had not filed any objection to the said application. Inspite of the same, the Trial Court has rejected the said application vide the impugned order on the ground that the written statement is filed after a period of more than 10 years from the date of filing of the suit. It is under these circumstances, defendant Nos.3 and 7 are before this Court.
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2251 WP No. 202494 of 2025 HC-KAR
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that defendant No.7 was impleaded in the present suit only on 27.10.2023 and the plaintiff has amended the plaint in O.S.No.488/2014 by including item Nos.10 to 14 properties on 03.02.2024. The Trial Court has failed to appreciate the aforesaid aspects of the matter and has erred in rejecting I.A.No.16. He submits that limitation provided to file written statement is directory and not mandatory.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1/plaintiff, who has opposed the petition, however, does not dispute the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners that defendant No.7 was impleaded in O.S.No.488/2014 only on 27.10.2023 and the plaint was subsequently amended on 03.02.2024. He fairly submits that written statement of defendant No.7 alone may be accepted and he also prays that the Trial Court may be directed to expedite trial and dispose of the suit at the earliest.
-6-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2251 WP No. 202494 of 2025 HC-KAR
6. The material on record would go to show that application to implead defendant No.7 was filed on 27.10.2023 and after service of notice, defendant No.7 had appeared before the Trial Court only on 03.08.2024. It appears that in the meanwhile the plaint was also amended by the plaintiff and item Nos.10 to 14 properties were included in the suit schedule. The Trial Court has failed to appreciate the aforesaid aspects of the matter and has rejected the application filed under Order 8 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of CPC, solely on the ground that the said application was filed after a period of 10 years from the date of suit. The learned counsel for respondent No.1/plaintiff has fairly submitted that the written statement filed on behalf of defendant No.7 who is the son of defendant No.3 may be received.
7. In view of the aforesaid, the Writ Petition is partly allowed. The impugned order passed on I.A.No.16 by the Trial Court in O.S.No.488/2014 is set aside and the -7- NC: 2026:KHC-K:2251 WP No. 202494 of 2025 HC-KAR Trial Court is directed to receive the written statement filed along with I.A.No.16 on behalf of defendant No.7 alone. Since the suit is of the year 2014, the Trial Court shall make endeavours to expedite the trial and dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE SWK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26 CT:PK