ORDER : The petitioners are before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 27.02.2015 in O.S.No.2335/2005 on the file of the 1st Addl.Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru. 2. The petitioners are plaintiffs and the respondents are defendants in O.S.No.2335/2005 filed for seeking judgment and decree for partition and separate possession. When the matter stood at the stage of cross-examination of defendants, the plaintiffs filed I.A.No.VII under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC to amend the suit schedule to include three more properties. 3. The said application was opposed by the defendants by filing objection. The trial Court by its order dated 27.02.2015 rejected I.A.No.VII filed under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC which is impugned in this writ petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the writ papers. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the suit is one for partition and separate possession and the amendment application is filed to include three more properties i.e., Sy.Nos.6/1, 6/9 and 63/3 to include in the suit schedule. It is further submitted that the defendants in their written statement contend that lands in Sy.Nos.6/1, 6/9 and 63/3 have not been included in the suit, which necessitated the plaintiffs to file application for amendment. If the amendment application is allowed, no prejudice or injustice would be caused to the defendants. On the other hand, it would assist the Court to arrive at a proper conclusion with regard to the dispute involved between the parties. 6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that the written statement was filed in the year 2007 and belatedly, the amendment application is filed. The counsel for the respondents further defends the order passed by the trial Court and submits that no reasons have been assigned in support of the application to amend the suit schedule to include three survey numbers. Therefore, the respondents pray for dismissal of the writ petition. 7. The suit is one for partition. The defendants in their written statement have taken up the contention that the three survey numbers which the plaintiffs want to include by way of amendment has not been included in the suit schedule for partition. Therefore, the respondents pray for dismissal of the writ petition. 7. The suit is one for partition. The defendants in their written statement have taken up the contention that the three survey numbers which the plaintiffs want to include by way of amendment has not been included in the suit schedule for partition. The plaintiffs by way of amendment intends to include those three survey numbers which are pointed out by the defendants in their written statement. The purpose of allowing the amendment application is to minimize the litigation and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings. When the application for amendment is filed subsequent to commencement of the trial, it is for the party who seeks amendment to indicate the reasons with regard to the due diligence. In the case on hand, the plaintiffs have sought for amendment to include three items of property. As the defendants had contended in their written statement that the said three items of properties are not included in the suit schedule, and further it is to be noted that in a suit for partition, even at the stage of final decree proceedings also, the properties could be included, in my view, the amendment sought on behalf of the plaintiffs deserves to be allowed. The trial Court erred in dismissing the application on the ground that the application is filed belatedly, in view of the fact that the suit is one for partition. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 27.02.2015 on I.A.No.VII in O.S.No.2335/2005 is setaside. The application I.A.No.VII under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC filed by the plaintiffs for amendment is allowed and the plaintiffs are permitted to include three items of properties as sought for in the amendment application. The trial Court to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible. The parties to cooperate with the trial Court to dispose of the suit.