Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 31865 (KAR)

SRI HUCHEGOWDA v. SRI H S JAGADEESH

MSA/109/2023 · 2025-06-10

H P Sandesh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19650 MSA No. 109 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO.109 OF 2023 (RO) BETWEEN: 1. SRI HUCHEGOWDA S/O LATE G.T. LINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS 2. SRI SHANMUKHA S/O LATE G.T. LINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS 3. SRI JAGANNATHA S/O LATE G.T. LINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS APPELLANTS NO.1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT: GOWDANAKATTE KASABA HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572217. 4. SMT. PUSHPA D/O LATE G.T. LINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/AT JAYACHAMARAJA PURA (J.C PURA) CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTIRCT-572214. 5. SMT. JAGADAMBA D/O LATE G.T. LINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT NAGATHIHALLY, HONNAVALLI HOBLI, Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19650 MSA No. 109 of 2023 TIPTUR TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTIRCT-572217. 6. SMT. VASANTHA D/O LATE G.T. LINGAPPA, W/O SHANTHAKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT SEEGEBAGI, HULIYAR HOBLI, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572214. 7. SMT. H.P. SUMITHRAMMA W/O M. RAJANNA, D/O H.G. PRAHANNA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/AT MALIGEHALLI CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTIRCT-572214. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. H.N. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI H.S. JAGADEESH S/O LATE SHIVANNA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT HEGGERE, KASABA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572227. 2. SMT. GANGAMMA W/O H.S. JAGADEESH D/O LATE H.C. PRABANNA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT HEGGERE, KASABA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572227. 3. H.S. PRAKASH S/O LATE SHIVANNA, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19650 MSA No. 109 of 2023 AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT HEGGERE KASABA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572227. 4. SHAKUNTALA D/O LATE SHIVANNA, W/O PANCHAKSHARAIAH, AGED ABOUT60 YEARS, R/AT J.C PURA, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 5. MANGALAMMA W/O LATE MAHALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT SIDDARAMESHWARA NILAYA, 5TH CROSS, SIDDAGANGA EXTENTION, TUMAKURU-572102. 6. NANDIANI D/O LATE MAHALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT SIDDARAMESHWARA NILAYA, 5TH CROSS, SIDDAGANGA EXTENTION, TUMAKURU-572102. 7. VINUTHA D/O LATE MAHALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT SIDDARAMESHWARA NILAYA, 5TH CROSS, SIDDAGANGA EXTENTION, TUMAKURU-572102. 8. PRASANNA S/O LATE MAHALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT SIDDARAMESHWARA NILAYA, 5TH CROSS, SIDDAGANGA EXTENTION, TUMAKURU-572102. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19650 MSA No. 109 of 2023 9. GOWRAMMA W/O LATE H.G. PRABHANNA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, R/AT HEGGERE, KASABA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 10. MURTHY, DEAD BY LRS. SUJATHA, W/O LATE MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT NEAR CEMENT FACTORY, AMMASANDRA, DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 11. YATHISHKUMAR S/O LATE MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NEAR CEMENT FACTORY, AMMASANDRA, DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 12. JAGADEESH S/O LATE MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NEAR CEMENT FACTORY, AMMASANDRA, DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 13. BHARATHI D/O LATE MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NEAR CEMENT FACTORY, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19650 MSA No. 109 of 2023 AMMASANDRA, DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 14. SURESHA, DEAD BY LRS. LINGARAJAMMA, W/O LATE SURESHA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT HEGGERE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 15. PUSHPA D/O LATE SURESHA, W/O H.P. LOKESH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT HEGGERE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 16. SIDDAGANGAMMA, DEAD BY LRS. CHANDRAMMA, D/O LATE SIDDAGANGAMMA, W/O MUNIRAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/AT DANDINASHIVARA, TURUVEKERE TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTIRCT. 17. VINODAMMA D/O LATE SIDDAGANGAMMA, W/O PANCHANNA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT SASALU VILLAGE, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19650 MSA No. 109 of 2023 DANDINASHIVARA, TURUVEKERE TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTIRCT. 18. SUVARNAMA D/O LATE SIDDAGANGAMMA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT LAKKAPPANAPALYA, SHETTIKERE HOBLI, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572227. 19. SRI SIDDARAMAIAH S/O LATE MALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/AT CEMENT FACTORY AMMASANDRA DANDINASHIVARA HOBLI, TURUVEKERE TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572227. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.S.PARIKSHITH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; R3, R4, R13, R14, R15, R16, R19 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; VIDE ORDER DATED 05.09.2024, NOTICE TO R5 TO R8 IS HELD SUFFICIENT; VIDE ORDER DATED 18.09.2024, NOTICE TO R11, R12, R17 AND R18 ARE DISPENSED WITH; VIDE ORDER DATED 18.09.2024, LRS OF DECEASED R9 AND R10 ARE ALREADY ON RECORD AT THE RISK OF APPELLANTS) THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER 43 RULE 1(u) R/W SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.08.2023 PASSED IN R.A.NO.10037/2016 ON THE FILE OF V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMAKURU (SITTING AT TIPTUR), ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.03.2009 PASSED IN FDP NO.4/1993 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TIPTUR, THE MATTER IS REMANDED BACK - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19650 MSA No. 109 of 2023 TO BE TRIAL COURT WITH A DIRECTED TO DISPOSE OFF THE MATTER AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE JUDGMENT OF HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA REPORTED IN ILR 2004 KAR 3664. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This matter is called twice in the morning and afternoon and in both the occasions, the counsel request for pass over and not assisting the Court in disposal of the matter. 2. Having read the order of the First Appellate Court in R.A.No.10037/2016, matter is remanded back only on the ground of technicality in view of amendment to Section 54 and also the relying upon the Judgment reported in ILR 2004 KAR 3664 and even extracted the principles laid down in the Judgment and also found that the Commissioners have allotted shares directly to the plaintiff and Trial Court has accepted the same and passed final decree. Hence, in view of the judgment comes to the conclusion that which is not proper in view of law laid - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19650 MSA No. 109 of 2023 down in the above judgment and matter requires to be remitted to the trial court for fresh consideration of the case in accordance with law laid down in the judgment. The said order has been challenged. 3. The counsel appearing to the respondent also relied upon the judgment passed by this court in R.S.A.No.100266/2021 vide order dated 30.01.2023, similar order was also passed and also matter is remitted back to the Trial Court to reconsider the matter in the light of the above legal and factual aspects of the matter within an outer limit of 2 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order and after affording opportunity to the parties, pass appropriate order in accordance with law. In this judgment also, this court taken note of the judgment passed in the case of Shivanna V/s Gowramma and others in R.S.A.No.1434/2016. 4. Having considered Section 54 (Karnataka Amendment of C.P.C, passed such an order and the same is discussed in paragraph No.13 of the judgment. When - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19650 MSA No. 109 of 2023 such being the case, I do not find any error committed by the Trial Court and First Appellate Court only for the limited purpose remanded the matter and even direction to dispose of the same in accordance with law within a time bound period of 6 months and this order was passed on 11.08.2023 and almost 1½ year has been elapsed by passing such an order and no grounds to keep the matter alive in view of the direction of the First Appellate Court that too relies upon the reported judgment and also this Court in the year 2023 also re-iterated the same and remanded the matter to take the decision within 2 months. When such being the case, I do not find any ground to entertain the second appeal and order of the First Appellate Court not suffers from any legality. Hence, M.S.A is dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE RHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40