- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37672 RSA No. 1126 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1126 OF 2014 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: H. NARASIMHA REDDY S/O HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT KURUGODA, THAMMANAHALLI, HOSUR HOBLI, GAURIBIDANUR TALUK - 561 208 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SOHANI HOLLA M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1A. K.KRISHNA REDDY SINCE DEAD BY LRS SMT. NIRMALA K.N. W/O. LATE KRISHNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 1B. SRI. CHETHAN K. S/O. LATE KRISHNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT KACHAMARANAHALLI KENEKERE POST, HOSUR HOBLI, GAURIBIDANUR TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA - 561 208 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARI KRISHNA K.A., ADVOCATE FOR R1(A TO C)) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05.04.2007 PASSED IN RA NO.13/2004 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, FAST TRACK COURT-V, CHIKKBALLAPUR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37672 RSA No. 1126 of 2014 FILED AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.11.2003 PASSED IN OS NO.212/1999 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC., GOWRIBIDANUR. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed against the order dated 05.04.2007 dismissing the appeal for non-payment of Court fee. 2. It is noticed that the Court fee payable is Rs.1,878/-. Admittedly, the present appeal is filed by the appellant with the aid of Legal Service Authority. 3. Before the First Appellate Court, the Legal Aid was denied. Hence, the appeal before the First Appellate Court was dismissed for not paying the Court fee. Thereafter, an application is filed under Order XLI Rule 19 of Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘Code’) to recall the order dismissing the appeal for non-payment of Court fee. The said application is dismissed on the ground that the application is not maintainable. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37672 RSA No. 1126 of 2014 4. The Court held that the application filed under Order XLI Rule 19 of the Code is maintainable only in case the appeal is dismissed under Order XLI Rule 11(2) of the Code. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the appeal should not have been dismissed for non-payment of Court fee as the appellant deserved legal aid. 6. It is urged that the Appellate Court ought to have granted one adjournment to pay the requisite Court fee. It is also urged that application under Order XLI Rule 19 of the Code ought to have been entertained and Court fee paid by the appellant should have been accepted. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the appellant is not eligible to claim legal aid and submits that he possesses sufficient property and his children are in Government service. 8. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the bar and perused the records. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37672 RSA No. 1126 of 2014 9. The following substantial question of law would arise for consideration: "Whether First Appellate Court is justified in dismissing the application filed under Order XLI Rule 19 of Code of Civil Procedure rejecting the prayer to restore the appeal?" 10. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the Court fee payable was later paid along with an application Order XLI Rule 19 of the Code on 07.02.2012 and the same was accepted. Thereafter, the application is dismissed on the premise that the application is not maintainable. 11. This Court having considered the contentions raised at the bar and also considering the fact that an application was filed before First Appellate Court under Order XLI Rule 19 of the Code along with requisite Court fee payable, First Appellate Court ought to have allowed the application. The dismissal of the application Order XLI Rule 19 of the Code is not justified when the Court fee was paid along with the application. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37672 RSA No. 1126 of 2014 12. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) Appeal is allowed. (ii) The impugned decree/order dated 03.04.2007 in R.A. No.13/2004 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Chikkaballapur are set- aside. (iii) The order dated 17.01.2012 dismissing the application under Order XLI Rule 19 Code of Civil Procedure is set-aside. (iv) The matter is remitted to First Appellate Court by restoring R.A. No.13/2004 for consideration in accordance with law. (v) Party shall appear before the First Appellate Court on 13.10.2025. (vi) Both parties shall cooperate for early disposal taking into consideration the fact that the appellant is senior citizen and also the suit is of the year 1999. SD/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE GVP,CHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11 ...