Plaintiff challenged rejection of his Order 6 Rule 17 CPC amendment application. Following Vipan Aggarwal vs. Raman Gandotra, the High Court declined interference, holding that a rejected amendment order can be challenged as a ground if an adverse decree is passed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO. 27757 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SRI. NANJAPPA, SON OF LATE BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, RESIDING AT MALLAGHATTA, WARD NO.2, BEGUR POST, KUNIGAL TOWN, TUMAKURU DISTRICT – 572 130. (SENIOR CITIZEN NOT CLAIMED) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PUNITH C.,ADVOCATE) AND:
SRI. M B NAGARAJU, SON OF LATE BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT MALLAGHATTA, WARD NO.2 BEGUR POST,KUNIGAL TOWN, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 130.
Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENT (BY SRI.K VIJAY KUMAR.,ADVOCATE FOR C/R)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 19.09.2024 PASSED IN OS NO. 79/2016 BY THE LEARNED PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUNIGAL AS PER ANNEXURE-E AND THEREBY ORDERED TO ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PLAINTIFF UNDER ORDER 6 RULE 17 OF CPC, FOR AMENDMENT AT ANNEXURE-C BY ALLOWING THE PETITION.
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
ORAL ORDER
Petitioner – plaintiff having suffered rejection of his Application in IA No.17 filed under Order 6 rule 17 r/w Section 151 of CPC, 1908 seeing leave to amend his pleadings is complaining before the Writ Court against its rejection vide trial judge’s order dated 19.09.2024, entered in a pending suit.
in VIPAN AGGARWAL & ANOTHER vs. RAMAN
GANDOTRA & OTHERS1 . This Court accordingly being broadly in agreement with the submission of the learned counsel appearing for Respondent on Caveat, declines indulgence in the matter.
Ordered accordingly and the Petition stands
dismissed.
Costs made easy.
Sd/(KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE
Bsv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2
1 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 442
1 issue framed by the court
Should the writ court interfere with the trial court's rejection of an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC to amend pleadings in a pending suit?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vipan Aggarwal & Another vs. Raman Gandotra & OthersRelied on¶2
2022 LiveLaw (SC) 442
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri. Nanjappa
Sri. M B Nagaraju
Krishna S Dixit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
