- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4167 WP No. 24528 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 24528 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: GANGADHARA S/O LATE K.SIDDAIAH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT KODIUGANE VILLAGE, HARADANAHALLI HOBLI CHAMARAJANAGAR -571 313 …PETITIONER (BY SMT.S.SUMATHI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. P.SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: NAGAIAH S/O LATE RACHAIAH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT KODIUGANE VILLAGE, HARADANAHALLI HOBLI CHAMARAJANAGAR-571 313 …RESPONDENT (BY SMT.MANASA R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. GOPALAKRISHNAMURTHY C., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED: 10.04.2017 PASSED BY THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE JMFC, CHAMARAJANAGARA IN O.S.NO.118/2016 ON I.A.NO.IV UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC VIDE ANNEXURE-C BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4167 WP No. 24528 of 2018 CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.4 in O.S. No.118/2016 dated 10.04.2017 by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC., Chamarajanagara, whereby the Trial Court had rejected I.A. which was filed under Section 151 of CPC to take the written statement on record, the defendant is before this Court. 2. It is the case that the respondent herein, had filed a suit seeking specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 09.11.1994. In that, the defendant had entered appearance on 01.06.2016 and had filed an application on 17.08.2016 seeking extension of time. Thereafter, he came up with I.A.No.4 to take the written statement on record. The Trial Court has dismissed the application and the right to file the written statement is forfeited and rejected the I.A. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/ defendant submits that the Trial Court has the discretion to grant the leave to file the written statement even after 90 days and finding of the Trial court that the right is forfeited is contrary to law. It is submitted that the suit is for specific - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4167 WP No. 24528 of 2018 performance of an agreement of sale of the year 1994. Unless an opportunity is given to contest the suit, the defendant would be put to irreparable loss and hardship. All these aspects are not considered by the Trial Court. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/ plaintiff submits that in spite of giving an opportunity, having entered appearance on 01.06.2016. He had failed to file the written statement till 23.11.2016. The Trial Court had rightly considered and rejected I.A.No.4. 5. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. The defendant had entered appearance on 01.06.2016. The present I.A. was filed on 23.11.2016. The observation of the Trial Court that the right itself is forfeited cannot be appreciated. The Trial Court has got the discretion to grant leave to the defendant to file the written statement. Considering the fact that the suit is for specific performance based on agreement of sale of the year 1994 and unless an opportunity is given it would cause lot of hardship to the defendant. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to allow - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4167 WP No. 24528 of 2018 the application on cost. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. The order impugned in I.A.No.4 in O.S. No.118/2016 dated 10.04.2017 by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC., Chamarajanagara, is set aside. I.A.No.4 filed by the petitioner/defendant is allowed on the condition that he shall pay an amount of Rs.2,000/- to the respondent/ plaintiff. ii. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. iii. All I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10