Mrs Rekha Sangwan vs Ms Vijayalaxmi Hiremath
2025 Latest Caselaw 9964 Kant

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."

NC: 2025:KHC:45650

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.

2012 SCC OnLine Kar 1420

NC: 2025:KHC:45650

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

NC: 2025:KHC:45650

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.

NC: 2025:KHC:45650

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