Karnataka High Court
The Cosmopolitan Club (R) vs Sri A N K Raju on 14 January, 2026
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:2390
WP No. 11 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO.11 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. THE COSMOPOLITAN CLUB (R)
22ND CROSS, 3RD BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU 560 011.
REPRESENTED BY ITS HON. SECRETARY
M.R. SANJAY
S/O M.T.RAMASWAMY GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.
2. SRI. S.C. KARIGOWDA,
SON OF MR. CHANNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS,
RESIDING AT #789, 'A' CROSS,
4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 041.
3. SRI. M.R. SANJAY,
S/O M.T. RAMASWAMY GOWDA,
Digitally AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
signed by R/AT NO.47/A, 36 'A' CROSS,
CHANDANA
BM 9TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 069.
Location:
High Court of ...PETITIONERS
Karnataka (BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI A N K RAJU
S/O A N NARAYAN RAJU,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
R/ AT NO.164/A, 20TH MAIN,
JP NAGAR, 2ND PHASE,
BENGALURU-560 078.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:2390
WP No. 11 of 2026
HC-KAR
2. SRI. RAVI SHANKAR
S/O LATE D SHIVARUDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
R/ AT NO.57, H.B. SAMAJA ROAD,
BASAVANGUDI,
BENGALURU -560 004.
3. SRI. T. V. EEKANATH
S/O LATE T.V.R. GUPTA,
AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS,
R/AT #47/A, 36 'A' CROSS,
9TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 069.
4. SRI. PRASAD TALLAM
T.N.KRISHNAIAH SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
R/AT #490, 7TH BLOCK, 7TH CROSS,
JAYANAGAR WEST,
BENGALURU-560 082.
5. SRI. KIRAN HOLLA
K.SHIVARAM HOLLA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/ AT NO.138, 7TH CROSS,
SUBRAMANYAPURA MAIN ROAD,
MARUTHI HOUSING CO-OP-SOCIETY,
BENGALURU-560 061.
6. SRI. UTTAM CHANDRASHEKAR
S/O MR. N CHANDRASHEKAR,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/ AT NO.1037, 14TH CROSS,
30TH MAIN, BSK 2ND STAGE,
BENGALURU-560 070.
7. MS. B.A. SOWMYA
D/ O B.S.ANNEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/ AT NO.373, T-301,
MEENAKSHI RESIDENCY,
16TH MAIN, 4TH T BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 041.
8. SRI. A.P. VENKAT NAIK
S/O MR. R.P. NAIK,
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:2390
WP No. 11 of 2026
HC-KAR
R/ AT NO.40, 14TH 'A' MAIN,
15TH 'A' CROSS, OPPOSITE TO BDA COMPLEX,
4TH SECTOR, HSR LAYOUT,
BENGALURU-560 102.
9. SRI. VENKATESH. B
S/O MR. K. BORAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
R/ AT NO.70/41, 11TH MAIN,
14TH CROSS, BSK 2ND STAGE,
PADMANABHANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 070.
10. DR. B.R. SANDEEP
S/O LATE DR.B.L.RAMAMURTHY,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/ AT NO.112, 2ND MAIN, 7TH BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 082.
11. SRI. SUMAL VASUDEV
S/O MR. B. R. VASUDEV,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT NO.17, 38TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN,
5TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 041.
12. SRI. K. S. KEDARNATH
S/O MR. K. R. SRIRAMALU,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT NO.292/A, 34TH CROSS,
9TH MAIN ROAD, 4TH BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560011.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SREENIVASA RAGHAVAN, SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARING FOR
SMT.NAYANA TARA B.G., ADVOCATE FOR C/R-1 & R-2)
THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION
OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN O.S NO.6688/2024
PASSED BY HON'BLE XV ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT
BENGALURU (CCH-3) AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:2390
WP No. 11 of 2026
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
This petition by defendant Nos.1 to 3 in O.S.No.6688/2024 is directed against the impugned order dated 16.12.2025 passed by the XV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, whereby the application - I.A.No.XI filed by the plaintiffs under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC seeking amendment of the plaint was allowed by the Trial Court.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Senior Counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and perused the material on record.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed the instant suit seeking declaration, permanent injunction in relation to the subject defendant No.1 -
club and other reliefs. The said suit having been contested by the petitioners - defendant Nos.1 to 3, before framing of issues, the respondent - plaintiff moved the instant application - I.A.No.11 seeking permission to amend the plaint. The said application having been opposed by the petitioners, the Trial Court proceeded -5- NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR to pass the impugned order allowing the amendment application by holding as under:
"ORDERS ON IA No. XI The Plaintiffs have filed the present IA No.11 under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking to amend the plaint with proposed amendments as under:-
"1. At page no. 3 of the plaint, the following paragraphs may be added after paragraph no.2 "2A. The Plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 are respectable members and two of the founding members of the Defendant No.1 club. Since the Defendant No.1 club's inception, Plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 have assumed various crucial positions in the management of the club, and have performed their duties in a diligent and upright manner so as to promote the club's interest and build the goodwill and reputation that the club presently possesses.
2B. The Plaintiffs continued to build the Defendant No.1 club by investing their time and energy, despite being persons of multiple professional commitments. Over the years, Plaintiffs, being a part of the club management, has ensured that a health club, well equipped library, restaurants, well maintained swimming pools, tennis court, sky lounge, landscape terrace gardens, and a car parking facility which can park about 300 cars were set up within the club vicinity, amongst other things. Apart from the above, Plaintiffs also ensured that the Defendant No.1 club was engaged in charitable and social work for which loan to the tune of Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore only) was taken from a trust named Cosmopolitan Club Corpus Fund Trust (CCCPT) which consisted of the Plaintiffs amongst others as life trustees. These funds were invested towards providing books for schools, providing healthcare, -6- NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR conducting marriages, and providing wholesome mid-day meals to around 1000 people every day, amongst other charitable purposes. The Plaintiffs ensured that the Club served its members as well as the underprivileged and needy sections of the society."
2.At page no.16 of the plaint, the following paragraphs may be added after para no. 30:
"30A. The aforesaid two notices dated 31.08.2024 were only issued to select few members, hand picked by the Defendants themselves, who support the illegal deeds of the illegal body running the management of the Defendant No.1 club. Plaintiffs were not served either of the two notices dated 31.08.2024 at all. Moreover, the aforesaid two notices dated 31.08.2024 were served through online medium of E-mail and WhatsApp, and not through registered post acknowledgement due (RPAD).
30B. As called for in the abovementioned 2 illegal notices dated 31.08.2024, an illegal Special General Body Meeting came to be convened by the illegal body at 10:00 A.M. on 22.09.2024 (hereinafter "Illegal SGM") in the Defendant No.1 club premises. In the Illegal SGM consisting of only select few members handpicked by the Defendant Nos.2 to 13, resolutions were passed to terminate the club memberships of Plaintiffs without having formed an enquiry committee, without conducting the enquiry into false allegations made against Plaintiffs and without providing an opportunity of being heard either by the enquiry committee or before any general body meeting, and in complete defiance of the Rule 10.6(e) of the Club Rules. Subsequent to this, the Plaintiffs were served their Termination Notices, both dated 24.09.2024, by the Defendants intimating that their primary memberships in the Defendant No.1 club have been permanently removed. These termination notices issued the Plaintiffs are in complete defiance of the Club Rules, principles of natural justice and the provisions of law.-7-
NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR 30C. Apart from terminating Plaintiffs' primary memberships to the Defendant No.1 club, the Defendants have also suspended other 4 members of the Club for not supporting their illegal deed, namely- Sri. N.H. Shariff, Sri. Srinivas G. Kappanna, Sri. Y.K. Muddukrishna and Sri. T.V. Sridar. They were suspended on frivolous and baseless grounds solely for the purpose of taking revenge vide suspension order dated 18.10.2024. The decision of the illegal body to terminate Plaintiffs primary membership to Defendant no. 1 Club and to suspend the said 4 members was taken in the said illegal SGM convened on 22.09.2024, the same can be witnessed from the minutes if the illegal SGM and orders of termination of Plaintiffs dated 24.09.2024 and the orders of suspension of the other 4 members dated 18.10.2024. The said 4 members have filed a separate suit challenging the said orders of suspension before this Hon'ble Court in O.S. No. 8464 of 2024.
30D. In the very same Illegal SGM, the proposed amendments to the Club Rules were discussed. The Defendants were successfully able to pass resolution to bring in amendments to the Club Rules (different from the proposed amendments and hereinafter referred as "Approved Amendments") as the meeting consisted solely of their supporters. The Approved Amendments brought in changes to the very fabric of the Club Rules such as those rules pertaining to Children of Children Quota, election rules, regular membership fees, disciplinary proceedings against office bearers etc., so as to ratify their illegal deeds and to make maximize the profits unlawfully in the short tenure that they occupy the posts for. The Minutes of Meeting of the Special General Body Meeting conducted in the Defendant No.1 club on 22.09.2024 reflects all the above stated illegal deeds that transpired during the Illegal SGM dated 22.09.2024.
30E. The Defendants are evidently having their personal interests, revenge and illegal gains at the forefront and thereby overshadowing the -8- NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR club's interest entirely. The Defendants have also opened an entirely new bank account for the club through which they operate and manage finances. The Defendants have been utilizing the club funds for their personal litigation expenses, especially for those which arose from their previous suspension of membership, amongst other personal purpose which are not in the club's interest. As such, the Defendants are continuing to do financial misappropriation and mismanagement to the Defendant No.1 club funds which had been raised all these years by the efforts of Plaintiffs and other members who had been occupying the posts of office bearers in the past.
th 30F. Defendants have also conducted the 30 Annual General Body Meeting on 22.12.2024 in a hurry to utilize the maximum of their time occupying the posts illegally for their own personal interests. The Minutes of Meeting of the 30th AGM reveals that the Defendants have utilized club funds to the tune of Rs.12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs only) towards litigation expenses, spent hefty amounts to the tune of 35 lakhs on unnecessary leisure events such as weekend members cocktail gala and 6 lakhs towards hospitality of government officers, without any budget approval. The Plaintiffs were once again given no notice for the meeting and the Defendant continues to perform financial misappropriation. The Illegal body has again given no heed to follow issuance of 21 days clear prior notice before the date of AGM conducted on 22.12.2024. The said illegal 30th AGM was conducted in violation of Club Rules and statutory provisions of Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960.
30G. The Defendants have not received any approval or sanction from the Registrar of Societies for the Approved Amendments to the Club Rules. As such, the Approved Amendments are not in force. Despite being aware of the same, the Defendants have proceeded to take in about 50 memberships under children quota per -9- NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR month under the provisions of Approved Amendments in Club Rules. The sole agenda is to maximize the personal profits by increasing members in the club and collecting fees from them. The aforesaid action of the Defendants to serve notices to select few members of the Club via online medium is in complete violation of Section 9, 10 and 11 (3) of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 and against the law laid down by Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the catena of judgements. Further, The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka has laid down that compliance of section 9 and 10 are mandatory while amending the MOA, rules and regulations of a society. Defendants are legally obligated to send a written report in form of a proposition to all members mentioning the amendments to be carried out and the reasoning for such amendments. Such Proposition to amend bye-laws has to be sent to all members via RPAD 21 days prior to the Special General Body Meeting. Further, such proposition to amend bye-laws has to be approved by the members of the Defendant No. 1 Club by casting votes. The illegal body constituted by Defendant No. 2 to 13 have completely failed to follow the statutory provisions governing amendment of bye-laws of the Club. Therefore, both the amendments to the bye-laws or club rules and the illegal SGM conducted on 22.09.2024 are illegal. Further, all decisions, actions and resolutions taken by Defendants on 22.09.2024 are illegal because the SGM called for was to approve amendments to bye-laws and as such SGM should have convened after strict adherence of statutory and mandatory compliance provided under Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 and Club Bye-laws and Rules. Hence The Suit.
30I. As of date, the Defendant Nos.2 to 13 continue to run the management of the Defendant No.1 club which they hijacked from the Plaintiffs who built the goodwill and reputation of the club by their blood, sweat and tears. The Defendants have ensured that the
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR Plaintiffs are being stripped away of their rights to avail club benefits in any way whatsoever despite having made all necessary payments duly. The Defendant No.1 club's present illegal management continues to act against the very club's interest and working towards their personal gains."
3.At page no.16 of the plaint, the following may be inserted in paragraph no.31 after "...selected members of their choice;" and before "cause of action continues to arise as..."
"on 22.09.2024, when the illegal SGM was conducted in the club with select few members to terminate the membership of the Plaintiffs and to bring in amendments to the Club Rules to ratify their illegal deeds; on 24.09.2024, when the Plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 were issued their membership termination notices illegally by the Defendants;"
4.At page no.17 of the plaint, the following additional prayers may be inserted after Prayer viii.
"ix. Declare the Special General Body Meeting of the Defendant No.1 club conducted on 22.09.2024 as illegal and void.
x. Declare that the Order dated 24.09.2024,whereby the Plaintiff No.1's club membership was terminated, is null and void ab initio.
xi. Declare that the Order dated 24.09.2024,whereby the Plaintiff No.2's club membership was terminated, is null and void ab initio." "
2. In support of the application the Plaintiffs have filed sworn statement stating that after the institution of the present suit, several major events took place directly relating to real matters in controversy to the present suit necessitating the filing of the present application for
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR amendment of plaint. Plaintiffs have further sworned that defendant nos.2 to 13 have conducted an SGM on 22.9.2024 illegally and passed resolution to terminate the membership of Plaintiffs in cosmopolitan club. The amendment of plaint required to avoid the multiplication of suit and unnecessary hardship to parties. It is stated that if the application is rejected, it will cause irreparable loss to the Plaintiffs on the contrary nothing would be caused to the Defendants if it is allowed. Therefore, Plaintiffs state that they need to amend pleadings towards adding these new material facts and add new reliefs towards the same and all such amendments prayed for are bona fide.
3. Per contra, the Defendant No.1 to 8,11 and 12 have filed their objections to the present IA No.11 contending that the same is not maintainable either in law or on facts. It is further contended that the Plaintiffs are terminated members of the club and the proposed amendments sought for by them is not tenable. It is contended that the cause of action for the present suit and the cause of actions for proposed reliefs are distinct and different and the same is filed only with intent to fill up the lacunae and contrary to the principles of amendment of plaint. Thus, viewed from any angle the IA No.11 filed by Plaintiffs is liable to be dismissed in limine. Wherefore it is prayed to dismiss the same in the interest of justice and equity.
4. The Defendant No.13 filed a separate common objection to several pending interim applications filed by the
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR Plaintiffs. In the said common objections he has also mentioned that his objections to the present IA No.11 also, wherein he narrated only on the ground that the Plaintiff are not filed the suit with clean hands and accordingly the proposed amendments are not permissible to file by the Plaintiffs. Wherefore it is prayed to dismiss the same with cost in the ends of justice.
5. On the basis of controversy between both sides the following points are arises my determination :-
1. Whether the plaintiff has made out sufficient grounds to allow him to amend the plaint as sought for?[
2. What order?
6. My findings on the above points are as under:-
Point No.1: In the affirmative Point No.2: As per final order.
For the following:-
REASONS
7. Point No.1: As could be seen from the record, it appears that the plaintiff has filed this suit against the defendants seeking the relief of Declaration Declare 29th AGM of defendant No.1's Club concocted on 05.04.2004 is illegal and void.
The defendant have appear and contested the matter by filing the respective written statement. During the course of proceedings of the suit the present application has been
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR filed by the plaintiff seeking leave of the Court to amend the plaint.
I have heard on both sides, the present application filed by the plaintiffs seeking amendment of the plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC. The learned counsels for both sides argued repeating the same set of facts as narrated in their respective application and objections. The gist of the same is already narrated above and accordingly to avoid repetition the same are not repeated. In addition to the same, the learned counsel for the Plaintiffs placed a non reportable order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No.30324/2019 between Dinesh Goyal @ Pappu vs. Suman Agarwal (Bindal) and Ors. On the other hand, in reply, the learned counsel for the other side fairly submitted that they have resisted the present application as formal in nature and leave to the court taking into consideration the principles of law. In the light of submissions of both sides I have carefully gone through the present application and the pleadings of the plaint.
8. The Order 6 Rule 17 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 relating to amendment of pleadings speaks as under:-
"17. Amendment of pleadings.--The Court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend his pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties:
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR Provided that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced, unless the Court comes to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial"
9. On plain reading of the above provision it is crystal clear that for the purpose of determining the real question in controversy between the parties may be allowed at any stage of the proceedings except due diligence is shown soon after commencement of the trial. Admittedly, the trial of the present suit is not yet begin. Even this court is not at all framed issues based on the present pleadings. It is undisputed facts between the parties to the suit that whatever the amendment sought to be made out in the plaint by the plaintiffs are also subsequent event and in respect of occurrence of such event in the Defendant No.1 cosmopolitan club is concerned there is no dispute between parties to the suit.
10. As could be seen from the unreported judgment of the Hon'ble apex court between Dinesh Goyal @ Pappu vs. Suman Agarwal (Bindal) and Ors. in SLP No.30324/2019, the settled principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex court regarding amendment of pleadings. Further it is held in the same judgment that the court should avoid a hyper- technical approach, ordinarily be liberal, especially when the opposite party can be compensated by costs.
11. At the outset, the suit of Plaintiffs is comprehensive in nature for declaratory relief and consequentially the permanent injunction restraining the
- 15 -
NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR Defendants from interfering with the enjoyment of the club benefits by the Plaintiffs as its members. The defendants have also filed their written statements and thus pleadings are completed. Looking to the pleadings of both sides the undisputed facts are the Plaintiff No.1 was being the President of the Defendant No.1 cosmopolitan club as on the date of 29th AGM which is questioned herein. It is also not in dispute that the Plaintiff no.2 was the vice president on that day and accordingly they are the authorized office bearers on the date of the cause of action arose for the present suit. On that day, the election of the Defendant No.1 club is admittedly conducted, but the same is seriously challenged by the Plaintiffs in the present suit and sought for declaratory relief that both AGM and election conducted on 5.5.2024 in the Defendant No.1 club is illegal and void. It is also contended in the suit that the Defendant No.2 to 13 who were formed a new body of the Defendant No.1 club is also seriously challenged as they are not authorized to declared as such and also they are not authorized to administer and management of the Defendant No.1 club. Thus the validity of conduct of the AGM dated 5.5.2024 and the validity of status of the election of the Defendants as office bearers of the Defendant No.1 club is real questions in controversy between the parties of this suit.
12. The proposed amendment sought for by the Plaintiffs is nothing but the act of the Defendant Nos.2 to 13 in the Defendant No.1 club as of office bearers which is real question in controversy. Such being the facts on record whatever the proposed amendment of facts in the plaint and
- 16 -
NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR the additional declaratory reliefs connecting to the same are part and parcel of the real controversy in question in the present suit. Accordingly, it is my considered opinion that the events which are proposed to be amend by the Plaintiffs are nothing but subsequent events connecting to the cause of action to the determination of real questions in controversy to the parties to the suit. Therefore none of the contentions taken by the defendants in resisting the present application are not acceptable. Moreso, during the arguments the learned counsel for the Plaintiffs submitted that he is ready to pay additional court fees on the additional reliefs as sought to be amend in the plaint. This apart, as I have already pointed out, the trial of the present suit is not at all commence and no issues are framed. In such of these circumstances, nothing will be prejudiced to the rights of the Defendants by allowing the proposed amendments as it is. Hence my findings on the above point no.1 is in the affirmative.
13. Point No.2: In the result of the discussions made supra, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER The IA No.XI filed by Plaintiffs under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC is hereby allowed.
No order as to cost.
The Plaintiffs are permitted to amend the plaint as mentioned in present application subject to payment of court fee as per the instruction of the office."
- 17 -
NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR
4. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that the Trial Court has correctly and properly considered and appreciated the averments made in the proposed amendment as well as the existing pleadings and has come to the correct conclusion that the proposed amendment was relevant and necessary for the purpose of adjudication of the issues in controversy between the parties.
The Trial Court has also taken note of the fact that some of the averments in the proposed amendment were events, which had occurred / transpired subsequent to institution of the suit, which would necessarily have to be pleaded by way of amendment to the plaint. In my considered opinion, as rightly held by the Trial Court, the impugned order allowing amendment is in conformity with the principles governing amendment of pleadings as held by the Apex Court in the following cases:
(i) LIC v. Sanjeev Builders (P) Ltd., (2022) 16 SCC 1
(ii) Dinesh Goyal @pappu v. Suman Agarwal (bindal) & ors. 2024 INSC 726
5. Further, the petitioners would be entitled to file their additional written statement to the amended plaint and no prejudice can be said to be caused to them. Under these circumstances and
- 18 -
NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR in the light of the judgments of the Apex Court in the aforesaid cases, the impugned order passed by the Trial Court allowing application - I.A.No.XI cannot be said to suffer from any illegality or infirmity warranting interference by this Court in exercise of my jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as held by the Apex Court in the cases of Radhey Shyam Vs. Chhabi Nath -
(2015) 5 SCC 423, K.P. Natarajan Vs. Muthalammal - AIR 2021 SC 3443 and Mohamed Ali Vs. V. Jaya & others - (2022) 10 SCC 477.
6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Trial Court has reserved the matter to 19.01.2026 for orders on I.A.Nos.6, 8, 9, 10 and 20 filed by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 - plaintiffs and since the petitioners intend to file additional written statement to the amended plaint as permitted by the impugned order, the Trial Court which has reserved the matter for orders to be pronounced on 19.01.2026 on the aforesaid I.A.Nos.6, 8 , 9, 10 and 20 may instead be directed to permit the petitioners to file amended written statement to the amended plaint and thereafter proceed to dispose of the said applications in accordance with law. The submission is placed on record.
- 19 -
NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR
7. Per contra, learned Senior counsel for the respondents-plaintiffs on instructions submits that he has no objection for the Trial Court to be issued directions to accept the additional written statement of the petitioners to be filed on 19.01.2026 and thereafter, dispose off the said application within a stipulated timeframe.
8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition without interfering with the impugned order and by issuing certain directions to the Trial Court.
9. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The petition is hereby disposed of without interfering with the impugned order.
(ii) The Trial Court is directed not to pronounce Orders on I.A.Nos.6, 8, 9, 10 and 20 on 19.01.2026. Instead the Trial Court shall permit the petitioners - defendant Nos.1 to 3 to file their amended written statement to the amended plaint on 19.01.2026.
(iii) Immediately upon the petitioners filing additional written statement to the amended plaint, the Trial Court shall hear
- 20 -
NC: 2026:KHC:2390 WP No. 11 of 2026 HC-KAR both sides on I.A.Nos.6, 8, 9, 10 and 20 and dispose of all the applications in accordance with law within a period of two weeks from 19.01.2026.
(iv) All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same.
Sd/-
(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63