- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24480 MSA No. 47 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO.47 OF 2023 (RO) BETWEEN: 1. SRI KENCHAPPA @ MUNIYAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY LEGAL HEIRS, ARASAPPA SINCE DECEASED, SMT. BHARDRAMMA, W/O ARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NAGANAYAKANAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, RAJRAJESHWARI CHOULTRY, BENGALURU DISTRICT 562115 2. SRI NAGARAJU S/O ARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT RAJARAJESHWARI KALYANA MANTAPA, OPP I B OFFICE, BANNURGATTA ROAD, ANEKAL TOWN, BENGALURU 562106 3. SMT. NEELAMMA W/O ARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24480 MSA No. 47 of 2023 4. SRI KUMAR S/O ARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 5. SRI ASHWATH S/O ARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, 3 to 5 are R/AT SIDIHOSKOTE, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT 562115 6. SMT. MUNITHAYAMMA D/O KENCHAPPA @ MUNIYAPPA W/O SAMPANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, SMT RAMAKKA, DIED DURING PENDENCY OF APPEAL 7. SRI C MANJUNATH S/O CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, 8. SRI MUNIRAJU S/O KENCHAPPA @ MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, APPELLANT NO.6 TO 8 ARE R/AT SIDIHOSKOTE, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT 562115 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. VISWANATHA SETTY V, ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24480 MSA No. 47 of 2023 AND: 1. ABDUL ALEEM S/O ABDUL RASHEED, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO 11, WELLINGTON STREET, RICHMOND TOWN, BENGALURU 560025 2. SRI K C CHANDRASHEKAR RAJU S/O LATE V S CHAGAMA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, 3. SR I K C BALAKRISHNA RAJU S/O LATE CHAGAMA RAJU AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS BOTH RESPONDENT No.2 AND 3 ARE R/AT No.933, 2ND MAIN DIVANRAPALYA, BENGALURU 560001 3. SRI K C LAKSHMI D/O V S CHAGAMARAJU, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT NO 1152, 14TH MAIN, 2ND STAGE, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, MAHALIKSHMA PURAM, BENGALURU 54 5. SRI M UJJINAPPA S/O LATE MUNISWAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT INDLAVADI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT 562115 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24480 MSA No. 47 of 2023 …RESPONDENTS (BY MS. ASHAL K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SRINIVASAN V, ADVOCATE) THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(u) OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.10.2022 PASSED IN R.A.No.5070/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, SIT AT ANEKAL AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. 2. This matter was heard on the previous occasion i.e., on 30.06.2025 and when the submission was made by the respondents’ counsel that after the matter was remanded, additional issues were framed by the Trial Court and led the evidence. In view of the said submission, this Court directed the counsel for the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24480 MSA No. 47 of 2023 appellants to make submission in this regard. Today, the counsel for the appellants submits that after the remand, issues were framed and posted for further chief of the appellants/plaintiffs. 3. The counsel submits that the First Appellate Court committed an error in making an observation that no opportunity was given to the respondents/defendants before the Trial Court. In his arguments, he has produced certified copy of the order sheet of the Trial Court to show that PW1 was examined on 23.09.2011 and documents at Ex.P1 to P37 were got marked and cross-examination was deferred and posted the matter for cross-examination on 13.10.2011. The record is evident that even though three witnesses have been examined as PW1 to PW3, none of the witnesses have been cross-examined and the matter was disposed of in the year 2017 that is after six years of evidence of PW1. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24480 MSA No. 47 of 2023 4. The records discloses that the in support of the evidence of PW2 and PW3, affidavits were filed on 16.12.2016 and PW2 and PW3 were examined on the very same day and posted the matter for cross-examination of PW2 and PW3 on 17.01.2017. On 17.01.2017, PW2 and PW3 were present before the Court and none appears on behalf or the defendants and hence, cross-examination of PW2 and PW3 was taken as nil and posted the matter for defendants’ evidence on 01.02.2017. On 01.02.2017, there was no representation and hence, on the very same day, evidence of defendants was taken as nil and posted the matter for arguments on 13.02.2017 and again adjourned the matter till 21.02.2017. On 21.02.2017, heard the arguments of both the sides and posted for judgment. 5. Having taken note of the material on record it discloses that though PW1 was examined in 2011 and thereafter applications were filed before the Court and ultimately PW2 and PW3 were examined and date was - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24480 MSA No. 47 of 2023 given for cross-examination of PW2 and PW3 and they have not been cross-examined and hence, posted the case for defendants’ evidence and when the matter was posted for defendants’ evidence, on the very same day, taken as no evidence and posted the matter for arguments and thereafter for judgment. Having taken note of the said fact into consideration, I do not find any error committed by the First Appellate in observing that no opportunity was given and only one day was given to lead the evidence and for cross-examination of PW2 and PW3 also only one date was given and thereafter taken as no cross-examination. When such being the case, I do not find any grounds to set aside the order passed by the First Appellate Court. 6. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following: ORDER The appeal is dismissed. The Trial Court is directed to dispose of the matter within six months from 10.07.2025. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24480 MSA No. 47 of 2023 The counsel for the defendants also directed to assist the Trial Court in disposal of the same within the stipulated time without showing the earlier attitude since PW1 was examined in the year 2011 and did not cross- examine PW1 and directed not to seek any adjournment unless for any genuine reason. In view of dismissal of the main appeal, I.A. if any, does not survive for consideration and the same stands dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SN