Nagaraju vs Smt Kamala T R
2023 Latest Caselaw 7249 Kant

                                           -1-
                                                      NC: 2023:KHC:37367
                                                    WP No. 12718 of 2023




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                         DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
                                          BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
                         WRIT PETITION NO. 12718 OF 2023 (GM-CPC)
                 BETWEEN:
                 NAGARAJU
                 S/O LATE RAMARAJU
                 AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
                 R/A TEGUR VILLAGE
                 CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT

                                                                ...PETITIONER
                 (BY SRI. PRAKASH M H., ADVOCATE)
                 AND:
                 1. SMT KAMALA T R
                    D/O LATE RAMARAJU
                    AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
                    W/O PUTTARAJU
                    R/A TEGURU VILLAGE
                    CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DIST
Digitally
signed by
VEENA
KUMARI B         2.   SMT KUSUMA
Location: High
Court of
                      D/O LATE RAMARAJU
Karnataka
                      AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
                      W/O NAGARAJU T R
                      R/A TEGURU VILLAGE
                      CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DIST

                                                             ...RESPONDENTS
                       THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
                 CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
                 DATED 26/05/2023 PASSED BY THE II ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
                                -2-
                                            NC: 2023:KHC:37367
                                         WP No. 12718 of 2023




AND JMFC, CHIKAMAGALURU IN OS NO 65/2022 ON IA NO 2 IN
ANNEXURE-F; GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS PENDING IN OS NO 65/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE II
ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHIKAMAGALURU.


     THIS    WRIT   PETITION    COMING     ON   FOR    PRELIMINARY
HEARING THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCE THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                               ORDER

The present respondent No.1 as plaintiff had instituted a

suit against the petitioner and present respondent No.2

arraigning them as defendants No.1 and 2 in O.S. No.65/2022

on the Court of II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC,

Chikkamagaluru (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'trial

Court') for the relief of partition and separate possession of

suit schedule property.

2. In response to the notice issued upon them the

present petitioner, as defendant No.1 appearing in the matter,

has filed written statement inter-alia contending that a

registered Relinquishment Deed has been executed by the

plaintiff, as such, the suit itself is not maintainable.

NC: 2023:KHC:37367 WP No. 12718 of 2023

3. It is thereafter the plaintiff came up with I.A.No.2

under Order 6 Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for

short 'CPC') seeking to amend the plaint by inserting a

paragraph in the plaint, as well, with a prayer to set aside the

alleged Release Deed dated 21.05.2020. The said application -

IA.No.2 came to be allowed under the order of the trial Court

dated 26.05.2023. Aggrieved by the same, defendant No.1 in

the trial Court is before this Court.

4. Heard the submission of the learned counsel for the

petitioner who is physically present.

5. From a perusal of the copies of the pleadings placed

before the Court and copies of the I.A. and impugned order it

is noticed that the plaintiff at the earliest point of time, in her

plaint, has not stated about the alleged Relinquishment Deed.

It is through the written statement filed by the defendant No.1

a pleading to the effect of the alleged Relinquishment Deed

came to be revealed before the Court. It is then, the plaintiff

came up with I.A.No.2 under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC. There is

NC: 2023:KHC:37367 WP No. 12718 of 2023

nothing to show at this stage on record that the plaintiff had

intentionally not revealed about the alleged Relinquishment

deed. On the contrary, plaintiff's contention is that she never

executed the said Relinquishment Deed, as such, she has even

sought for amendment in the prayer incorporating a prayer

seeking to set aside the said Relinquishment Deed.

6. Admittedly, the trial in the trial Court has not yet

been begun. Under such a circumstance, plaintiff after coming

to know about alleged document through the written

statement filed by the defendant, has sought for an

amendment in the plaint and if the same is considered, it

would not cause any prejudice to the interest of the defendant

in the trial Court.

7. Further when the defendant has taken a specific

contention in the best interest of justice, it is necessary to

accommodate the plaintiff with her contention about the

alleged document, which, in the circumstances of the case

warrants the amendment of the pleading as sought for. As

such, I do not find any ground to proceed further in this

NC: 2023:KHC:37367 WP No. 12718 of 2023

petition by causing notice upon the respondent or to admit the

Writ Petition or further proceeding.

Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed as devoid of

grounds for admission and causing notice to the respondents.

Registry to transmit an e-copy of this judgment to the

concerned trial Court immediately for its information.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BVK