- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12718-DB RFA No. 100148 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100148 OF 2023 (SP) BETWEEN: BALAPPA, S/O. KALLAPPA HALAGOND, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. ALAKHANUR-591120, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. C.S.SHETTAR, ADVOCATE) AND: YASHAVANT, S/O. KAREPPA HALAGOND, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. ALAKHANUR-591120, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SANGAMESH S.GHULAPPANAVAR, ADVOCATE) SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12718-DB RFA No. 100148 of 2023 THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.08.2022 PASSED IN O.S.NO.81/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, RAIBAG, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) This appeal by the defendant in O.S. No.81/2020 is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 26.08.2022 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Raibag (for short, ‘the Trial Court’), whereby the said suit field by the respondent/plaintiff against the appellant/defendant for specific performance of an alleged sale agreement dated 23.09.2013 was decreed in favour of the respondent/plaintiff against the appellant/defendant by the Trial Court. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12718-DB RFA No. 100148 of 2023 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondent/plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit against the appellant/defendant, inter alia, contending that the appellant/ defendant had executed the sale agreement dated 23.09.2013 in respect of the suit schedule immoveable property in favour of the respondent/plaintiff for a total sale consideration of Rs.20,00,000/- out of which the respondent/plaintiff paid a sum of Rs.18,00,000/- towards advance and part of sale consideration and agreed to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the respondent/plaintiff after receiving the balance sale consideration. The appellant/defendant entered appearance and disputed and denied various allegations and claims made by the plaintiff as well as the execution, legality and validity of the sale agreement relied upon by the plaintiff and sought for dismissal of the suit. 4. Based on the aforesaid pleadings, the Trial Court framed the following issues: “1. Whether the plaintiff proves that, on 23.09.2013 there was an agreement in between the plaintiff and defendant. The defendant has agreed to sell the suit property for Rs.20,00,000/- and received the part - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12718-DB RFA No. 100148 of 2023 consideration amount of Rs.18,00,000/- and agreed to execute the registered sale deed on or before 23.09.2019? 2. Whether the plaintiff proves that, he is ready and willing to perform his part of contract? 3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief as prayed for? 4. What Order or decree?” 5. The respondent/plaintiff examined himself as P.W.1 and two more witnesses as P.W.2 and P.W.3 and got marked three documents as Exs.P.1 to P.3. The appellant/defendant examined himself as D.W.1, but did not produce and mark any documentary evidence. 6. After hearing the parties, the Trial Court answered issue No.1 supra in favour of the plaintiff thereby coming to the conclusion that the plaintiff had proved the execution of the alleged sale agreement dated 23.09.2013 by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff and that the defendant received a sum of Rs.18,00,000/- out of the total sale consideration of Rs.20,00,000/- from the plaintiff towards advance and part of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12718-DB RFA No. 100148 of 2023 the sale consideration. However, issue No.2 was answered by the Trial Court against the respondent/plaintiff by coming to the conclusion that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform his part of contract as a result of which the Trial Court decreed the suit in part and directed the appellant/defendant to refund advance amount of Rs.18,00,000/- to the respondent/plaintiff. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree of the Trial Court, the appellant/defendant is before this Court by way of the present appeal. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the respondent jointly submit that due to oversight and inadvertence as well as on account of bona fide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, relevant oral and documentary evidence was not adduced both by the plaintiff and the defendant during trial before the Trial Court and as such, the impugned judgment and decree may be set aside and the same be remanded back to the trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law by permitting both sides to adduce additional oral and documentary evidence in support of their respective claims. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12718-DB RFA No. 100148 of 2023 8. The submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent, on instructions, is placed on record. 9. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the joint submission made on behalf of the appellant as well as the respondent that both the parties intend to adduce additional oral and documentary evidence in support of their claim, though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the rival contentions, we deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned judgment and decree and remit the matter back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh on merits in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. 10. In the result, we pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is hereby allowed. ii) The impugned judgment and decree, dated 26.08.2022, passed in O.S. No.81/2020 by the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12718-DB RFA No. 100148 of 2023 Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Raibag, is hereby set aside. iii) The matter is remitted back to the Trial Court for re-consideration afresh in accordance with law. iv) The appellant and the respondent undertake to appear before the Trial Court on 15.10.2025 without awaiting further notice from the Trial Court. v) Liberty is reserved in favour of the appellant and the respondent to adduce oral and documentary evidence in support of their respective claims. vi) Both the parties are directed not to alienate, encumber or create third party rights over the suit schedule property till the disposal of the suit, after remand as stated supra. vii) The Trial Court is directed to consider and dispose off the suit afresh as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of nine months from 15.10.2025. viii) All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter between the appellant/defendant and the respondent/plaintiff are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12718-DB RFA No. 100148 of 2023 Registry of this Court is directed to refund the entire court fee paid on the memorandum of appeal to the appellant forthwith without any delay. Registry is directed to re-transmit the Trial Court records to the Trial Court forthwith. Sd/- (S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE KMS Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32