- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1431 WP No. 103313 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 103313 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. SHANTAVVA W/O BASAPPA KOTI AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. UNKAL KHUBLI,K DIST. DHARWAD 580031 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH M KHARVI,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SAVITHA D/O GURUNATH YAMANUR W/O SATISH VANTAGODI AGE. 47 EYARS, OCC. PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O. TIRLAPUR, TQ. NAVALAGUND, NOW AT KALUGOD, TQ. GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI-591310. 2. GEETA D/O GURUNATH YAMANUR AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O. TIRLAPUR, TQ. NAVALAGUND, NOW HDFC BANK, KOPPIKAR ROAD, HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARSH DESAI., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.01.29 11:44:08 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1431 WP No. 103313 of 2022 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE THE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY ORDER OR DIRECTIONS TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17/08/2022 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT.NAVALAGUND IN O.S.NO.250/2012, ORDER ON I.A.NO.13,14,15 AND IA ORDER COPY MARKED AS ANNEXURE-J. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any order or directions to quash the impugned order dated 17.08.2022 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Navalagund in O.S.No.250/2012, order on I.A.No.13, 14, 15 and IA order copy marked as Annexure-J; b. Issue any other writ or order which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the dismissal of three applications filed by the petitioner in IA Nos.13, 14 and 15 filed under Order 18 Rule 17, Section 151 and under Order 7 Rule 14 of the Code of Civil - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1431 WP No. 103313 of 2022 Procedure. The said applications have been filed seeking for permission of the Court to produce certain documents and a CD and for recalling the plaintiff for further chief-examination. 3. The said application came to be rejected by the impugned order firstly on the ground that the arguments of both the counsels had already been heard and that the application was filed in a belated stage. Secondly, on the ground that the applications have been filed to fill up the lacunae pointed out by the defendant during the cross-examination of the plaintiff's witness as also during the course of arguments. It is challenging the same, that the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs. 4. The suit was of the year 2012, initially the suit came to be decreed on 21.9.2017 on an appeal being filed, the decree was set aside and the matter remitted to a trial Court vide order dated 04.09.2021 in RFA - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1431 WP No. 103313 of 2022 No.100394 of 2017. This Court had at the time of remand, directed the trial Court to provide an opportunity to cross-examine the plaintiff's witness and lead the defendant's witness to the appellant in the said appeal. 5. It is in the pursuance thereof, that the matter was taken up by a trial Court evidence was led and arguments were heard of both the parties, at that stage that the aforesaid applications have been filed. 6. The burden of proof that the plaintiff has the money to make payment of the sale consideration and as such opportunity is to be granted to the plaintiff cannot be accepted at this stage when the matter is posted for arguments. The plaintiff had enough and sufficient time from the time of filing of the suit to have produced those documents. Since it is the burden of the plaintiff to prove readiness and willingness which is required to be discharged. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1431 WP No. 103313 of 2022 7. After evidence being completed and arguments being heard, if the defendant has taken up the contention in the written statement that the plaintiff was not ready and willing and did not have the amounts required to make payment of the sale consideration, the same was to be discharged at the time the plaintiff led his evidence, at the belated stage after arguments are completed, the plaintiff cannot seek to bring any new document on record. Thereby, rendering the defence taken by the defendants negatory by filling up the lacuna pointed out by the defendants. 8. In that view of the matter, I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the trial Court. The petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61