- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB RFA No. 100285 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 9TH 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. 100285 OF 2025 (-) BETWEEN: SMT. TARADEVI *SMT. TARABAI W/O. KRISHNA @ KRISHNAPPA LAMANI, AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. SECTOR NO.44, NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT-587 101. &APPELLANT (BY SRI. H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. RADHA K.L. @ SMT. RADHA KISANCHAND, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. LOKANATH BUILDING, MUCHAKHANDI CROSS, BAGALKOT, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT-587101. &RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B. HIREMATH & MS. GAYATRI S.R., ADVOCATES) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL, SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.04.2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BAGALKOT IN O.S.NO.288/2024, AND DISMISS THE SUIT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: *Corrected vide court order dated 21.11.2025. (CMPJ) CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB RFA No. 100285 of 2025 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 C.M. POONACHA) The present appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 19081, by the appellant/defendant challenging the judgment and decree dated 15.04.2025 passed in O.S.No.288/2024 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Bagalkot2, whereunder, the suit for specific performance of contract filed by the respondent/plaintiff has been decreed by the Trial Court. 2. The parties will be referred to as per their ranking before the Trial Court, for the sake of convenience. 3. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant agreed to sell the suit property to the plaintiff, and accordingly, the parties entered into an agreement of sale dated 25.05.2015, whereunder the defendant agreed to sell the suit property for a 1 Hereinafter referred to as the 8CPC9 2 Hereinafter referred to as the 8Trial Court9 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB RFA No. 100285 of 2025 total consideration of ¹29,11,000/-. That the plaintiff paid a sum of ¹10,00,000/- as earnest money. As the defendant did not come forward to complete the sale transaction, the plaintiff got issued legal notices dated 17.11.2023 and 05.09.2024. Since the defendant failed to receive the said notices, the plaintiff has filed a suit for specific performance of the contract before the Trial Court. 4. Although the suit summons was duly served on the defendant, he has remained ex parte. 5. Based on the pleadings of the parties, the Trial Court framed the following points for consideration: <1.Whether the plaintiff has proved that, the defendant had executed in her favour the agreement of sale dated:25/05/2015 and received from her a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- as an earnest money? 2.Whether the plaintiff has further proved that, she has always been ready and willing to perform her part of contract? 3.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of Specific Performance? - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB RFA No. 100285 of 2025 4.What order or decree?= 6. The power of attorney holder of the plaintiff examined himself as PW.1. The plaintiff also examined attesting witness as PW.2 and got marked documents as Exs.P1 to Ex.P8. The Trial Court, by its judgment and decree dated 15.04.2025, decreed the suit and passed the following: ORDER That, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed with costs. That, the defendant is hereby directed to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff by receiving the balance sale consideration amount of Rs. 19,11,000/- within two months from the date of this order and if the defendant fails to execute the said registered sale deed within the said period, then the plaintiff is at liberty to get execute the said registered sale deed in her favour at the costs of the defendant in accordance with law. That, draw the decree accordingly.= 7. Being aggrieved, the defendant has filed the present appeal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB RFA No. 100285 of 2025 8. Along with the above appeal, I.A.No.2/2025 is filed under Order XLI Rule 27 of the CPC to produce two documents i.e., order sheet of the Trial Court as well as a copy of the grant order dated 17.01.2006 issued by the Bagalkot Town Development Authority in favour of mother of the appellant. 9. Heard the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant/defendant as well as the learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff. 10. Although the defendant has raised various contentions on the merits of the matter by contending, inter alia, that the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court is liable to be interfered with on the ground that the suit is barred by limitation and that the plaintiff has not demonstrated his entitlement for specific performance of the agreement dated 25.05.2015, it is evident that the defendant did not enter appearance before the Trial Court and did not contest the suit on its merits. 11. The learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff vehemently opposing I.A.No.2/2025 contends that the grant - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB RFA No. 100285 of 2025 order dated 17.01.2006, which has been produced along with I.A.No.2/2025 is a photocopy, and the same cannot be taken on record. 12. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material on record including the records of the trial Court, the following points arise for consideration: i) Whether IA No.2/2025 is required to be allowed? ii) Whether the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court is liable to be interfered with? Regarding Question No.(i): 13. It is forthcoming from the averments made in the affidavit accompanying IA No.2/2025 that the same pertain to the merits of the matter and the appellant-defendant not having contested the suit of the respondent-plaintiff on its merits before the Trial Court, the contention put forth by the appellant- defendant on the merits of the matter is required to be adjudicated by the Trial Court after affording an opportunity to the appellant-defendant in that regard. For the said purpose it is - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB RFA No. 100285 of 2025 just and proper that IA No.2/2025 be allowed and the documents produced along with the application be taken on record subject to affording an opportunity to the defendant to produce the grant order dated 17.01.2006 or its certified copy before the Trial Court. Hence, question No.(i) framed for consideration is answered in the affirmative. Regarding Question No.(ii): 14. As noticed above, it is clear that the defendant did not enter appearance before the Trial Court and did not contest the suit of the respondent-plaintiff on its merits. Having regard to the fact that valuable rights of the parties have been adjudicated by the Trial Court, including right, title and interest in immovable property, it is just and proper that before such an adjudication is made, the appellant-defendant be afforded with another opportunity to contest the suit before the Trial Court on its merits. For the said purpose, it is just and proper that the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court be set aside and the matter be remitted back to the Trial Court for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Hence, question No.(ii) framed for consideration is answered in the affirmative. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB RFA No. 100285 of 2025 15. Hence, the following: ORDER i) IA No.2/2025 is allowed and the documents produced along with the application are taken on record, reserving liberty to the appellant- defendant to produce the grant order dated 17.01.2006 or its certified copy before the trial Court; ii) The appeal is allowed; iii) The judgment and decree dated 15.04.2025 passed in O.S.No.288/2024 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Bagalkot, is set aside; iv) Both the parties shall appear before the Trial Court on 15.10.2025 without the requirement of any further notice being issued in this regard; v) The appellant-defendant shall file his written statement on the date of his appearance before the trial Court i.e. on 15.10.2025; - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB RFA No. 100285 of 2025 vi) Consequent to the appearance of the parties and the filing of the written statement by the defendant, the Trial Court shall conduct further proceedings in accordance with law, by affording an opportunity to both parties to adduce oral and documentary evidence; vii) All the contentions of the parties on the merits of the matter are kept open; viii) The Court fee paid by the appellant in the above appeal be refunded to the appellant. Sd/- (S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE PMP CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15