Dismissed¶26

Sri. C. R. Sathyanarayana v. Sri. C. S. Sharath Kumar

Karnataka HC20 Feb 2025WP/29199/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court; Article 227 supervisory jurisdiction; amendment of plaint; Order 6 Rule 17 and Section 151 CPC; partition and separate possession suit; inclusion of joint family properties; defence via written statement; no prejudice to defendants; writ petition dismissed; WP No. 29199 of 2024; O.S.No.13/2017, I Addl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Davanagere; order dated 06.08.2024; I.A.No.40.

What did the court decide?

In a suit for partition and separate possession, all the joint family properties have to be included in the plaint; if a defendant contends that certain properties are not joint family properties, he can take that defence by filing a written statement. ¶22

Sri. C. R. Sathyanarayana Vs Sri. C. S. Sharath… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition under Article 227 should interfere with the Trial Court's order allowing the plaintiff's application (I.A.No.40 under Order 6 Rule 17 r/w Section 151 CPC) to amend the plaint in the partition suit so as to include additional properties.

¶25

Court's answer

¶22

Ratio / Principle

Allowing the amendment application does not cause any prejudice to the rights of the defendants; therefore the Trial Court rightly allowed the application filed by the plaintiff.

¶24

Key takeaways

Viewed from any angle, there is no error or illegality in the order passed by the Trial Court, and no good grounds are made out to exercise the supervisory jurisdiction vested under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (H.T. Narendra Prasad, J.) dismisses a writ petition under Article 227 filed by defendant No.1 challenging the order dated 06.08.2024 of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Davanagere, allowing the plaintiff's I.A.No.40 under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC in O.S.No.13/2017 (a suit for partition and separate possession), permitting amendment of the plaint to include some additional properties. Held: in a suit for partition and separate possession, all joint family properties must be included in the plaint; a defendant who contends that a property is not joint family property may take that defence in the written statement; allowing the amendment causes no prejudice to the defendants. Finding no error or illegality in the Trial Court's order and no grounds to exercise supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227, the Court dismissed the petition and directed the Trial Court to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:7640 WP No. 29199 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 29199 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. C. R. SATHYANARAYANA S/O LATE CHANNAGIRI RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS R/AT NO.68/1 TO 4 RANGA MAHAL, II MAIN P.J. EXTENSION, DAVANGERE-577002.

¶10

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. PATIL BHARATI TAMMANAGOUDA.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

SRI. C. S. SHARATH KUMAR S/O C.R. SATHYANARAYANA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O 68/1 TO 4, RANGA MAHAL II MAIN, P.J. EXTENSION DAVANGERE-577002.

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED: 06.08.2024 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A PASSED ON I.A.NO.40 UNDER ORDER 6 RULE 17 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN O.S.NO. 13 OF 2017 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC DAVANAGERE AND ETC.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:7640 WP No. 29199 of 2024

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner-defendant No.1 challenging the order dated 06.08.2024 passed by the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Davanagere, on I.A.No.40 filed by the plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC in O.S.No.13/2017, whereby the Trial Court has allowed the said application.

¶22

The plaintiff filed the suit for partition and separate possession. On service of suit summons, the defendants have appeared and filed written statement. After completion of evidence of parties, the plaintiff has filed I.A.No.40 seeking amendment to plaint to include some of the properties. In a suit filed for partition and separate possession, all the joint family properties have to be included in the plaint. If the defendants have any grievance that the properties are not joint family

¶23

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7640 WP No. 29199 of 2024

¶24

properties, he can take such a defence by filing written statement. By allowing the amendment application, it will not cause any prejudice to the rights of the defendants. Therefore, the Trial Court after considering all these aspects has rightly allowed the said application filed by the plaintiff.

¶25

Viewed from any angle, there is no error or illegality in the order passed by the Trial Court. No good grounds are made out to exercise the supervisory jurisdiction vested under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶26