- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7726 WP No. 17327 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 17327 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI RAVI KUMAR K T S/O LATE K G THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT KUNDIHALLI VILLAGE,HOSURU HOBLI GOWRIBIDANUR TAUK-561210. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HARI KRISHNA K A.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI KRISHNA NAIK S/O LATE NARAYANANAIK AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 2. SMT GOWRAMMA W/O KRISHNA NAIK AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 3. SRI GANGADHAR NAIK S/O KRISHNA NAIK AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 4. KUM GOUTHAMI D/O GANGADHARA NAIK AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS 5. KUM GAGANA D/O GANGADHARA NAIK Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7726 WP No. 17327 of 2024 AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS 6. MALE BABY (NOT NAMED) S/O GANGADHARA NAIK AGED ABOUT 05 YEARS R4 TO R6 ARE MINORS, REP BY THIER FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SRI GANGADHAR NAIK ALL ARE RESIDING AT KUNDIHALLI VILLAGE, HOSURU HOBLI GOWRIBIDANUR TAUK-561210. …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO R1 TO R6 ARE HELD SUFFCIENT VIDE ORDER DATED: 20.02.2025) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH / SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED: 27.04.2024 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GOWRIBIDANUR IN O.S.NO. 114/19 ON I.A. FILED U/S 151 OF CPC VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 151 OF CPC VIDE ANNEXURE-H AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER Notice issued to respondents returned with the postal shara ‘refused’. Hence, the notice to respondents is held sufficient. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7726 WP No. 17327 of 2024 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner called in question the order dated 27.04.2024 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Gowribidanur in O.S.No.114/2019 filed under Section 151 of CPC seeking permission to deposit the balance sale consideration amount as per the judgment and decree. 3. The plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of the contract. The suit has been decreed by judgment and decree dated 21.12.2023 holding that the plaintiff has to deposit the balance sale consideration amount in the court within three months from the date of pronouncement of the judgment, with notice to the defendant. After expiry of three months, the plaintiff filed an application under Section 151 of CPC seeking for remittance of the balance sale consideration of Rs.3,00,000/- as per the decree. Since three months period was over, the trial court rejected the same. There is no error or illegality in the order passed by the trial court. If the plaintiff filed an - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7726 WP No. 17327 of 2024 application for extension of time and if the court granted extension of time, then, he could have remitted the same. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of ISHWAR (SINCE DECEASED) THE LRs. AND OTHERS vs. BHIM SINGH AND ANOTHER (Civil Appeal No.10193/2024 DISPOSED OF ON 03.09.2024) contending that if an application is filed and if the court is satisfied, the court which passed the decree has the power to extend the time. If that would be the case, liberty is reserved to the petitioner/plaintiff to file such an application before the competent court. If such an application is filed, the same may be considered in accordance with law. 5. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38