- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36572 MFA No. 3927 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3927 OF 2025 (CPC) BETWEEN: SRI KUMAR S C AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, S/O LATE CHIKKANNA, R/AT NO.19, 6TH CROSS, BALAJI NAGAR, BANASHANKARI, 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE-560 085. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. VEMAREDDY S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI RAMACHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, S/O LATE LAKSHMIPATHY, 2. SRI. NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, S/O SRI. ANNAYAPPA SHETTY, 3. SRI. SONNAPPA. H. L. AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O SRI. ANNAYAPPA SHETTY, 4. SRI. KODANDARAMA. H. L. AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O SRI. ANNAYAPPA SHETTY, ALL ARE R/AT HEROHALLI VILLAGE, YESWANTHAPUR HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36572 MFA No. 3927 of 2025 THIS MFA IS FILED U/O.43 RULE 1 OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DT.16.04.2025 PASSED IN M A. NO.55/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC. THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT The office has raised objection that appeal is not maintainable since the appellant has already exhausted remedy of appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1 of CPC. Therefore, one more appeal before this Court under the same provision is not maintainable. This is the objection raised by the office. 2. The Office is correct in raising the objection. M.A.No.55/2024 is filed before the Court of II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of CPC. Therefore, the remedy is already exhausted under Order XLIII. Therefore, the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36572 MFA No. 3927 of 2025 instant appeal under the same provision is not maintainable. 3. Hence, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. However, liberty is reserved to the appellant to approach before the appropriate Forum as per law. 4. The time spent for prosecuting the appeal before this Court is excluded for the purpose of limitation as per Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. 5. Registry is directed to return all the original copies to the appellant. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE KA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33