- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10628-DB RFA No. 100265 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100265 OF 2022 (DEC/INJ-) BETWEEN: SMT. SHOBHA W/O. MARUTI SATAYAPPANAVAR, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE, R/O. E.W.S. 264, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580002. …APPELLANT (BY MS. ARADHANA V. MANVI FOR SRI. JAGADISH PATIL, ADVOCATES) AND: SMT. HANAMAVVA W/O. BHIMAPPA SATYAPPANNAVAR, AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. NEAR RACHOTESHWAR TEMPLE, DIST: GADAG-582114. …RESPONDENT (NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS SERVED) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., PRAYING TO ADMIT THE APPEAL AND CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER IN O.S.NO.82/2018 DATED 06.11.2020 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, GADAG, AND ETC. THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR 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 YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10628-DB RFA No. 100265 of 2022 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) This appeal by the defendant in O.S.No.82/2018 is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 06.11.2020 passed therein by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gadag1, whereby the said suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff against the appellant/defendant for declaration, possession and other reliefs in respect of the suit schedule immovable property was decreed by the Trial Court in favour of respondent/plaintiff against the appellant/defendant. 2. Heard the learned counsel Smt.Aradhana V Manvi for the appellant/defendant and perused the material on record. The respondent/plaintiff having been served with notice of this appeal has chosen to remain unrepresented and has not contested this appeal. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondent/plaintiff is the mother-in-law of the appellant/defendant, whose husband viz., Maruti S/o. Bheemappa Satyappanavar expired on 28.11.2019 while he 1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial Court’ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10628-DB RFA No. 100265 of 2022 was working in the Karnataka State Reserve Police Department leaving behind the appellant/widow and respondent/mother as his Class-I legal heirs. Upon the demise of the aforesaid Maruti, the appellant/widow was appointed as a supervisor in S.R.Bommai High School by way of compensatory appointment. 4. The respondent/plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit against the appellant/defendant contending that the suit schedule properties originally belonged to plaintiff’s father- Khandappa and upon his demise, the respondent/plaintiff became the absolute owner of the suit schedule properties and the revenue records were mutated into her name. It is contended that the appellant’s husband managed to get the mutation changed to his name on the basis of a false Varadi and upon his demise, the appellant/defendant attempted to put forth a claim over the suit schedule properties and as such, the respondent/plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit for declaration, possession and other reliefs against the appellant/defendant. 5. The appellant/defendant entered appearance and filed her written statement and contested the suit pursuant to which the Trial Court framed the following issues: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10628-DB RFA No. 100265 of 2022 1. Whether the plaintiff proves that, she is the absolute owner of the suit schedule properties? 2. Whether the plaintiff proves that, she is in possession over the suit schedule properties as on the date of the suit? 3. Whether the plaintiff proves that, the defendant is obstructing to the plaintiff over the possession of suit schedule properties? 4. Whether the defendant proves that, she is owner and in possession over the suit schedule properties? 5. Whether the plaintiff proves that, she is entitled relief as claimed in the plaint? 6. What order or decree? 6. The respondent/plaintiff examined herself as PW1 and documentary evidence at Ex.P1 to Ex.P16 were marked. The appellant/defendant having examined herself as DW1 and marking the documentary evidence at Ex.D1 to Ex.D31, she did not tender herself for cross-examination and her evidence/examination in chief stood expunged and discarded. The appellant/defendant did not contest the matter further, after remaining absent for her cross-examination. Under these circumstances, the Trial Court heard the arguments of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10628-DB RFA No. 100265 of 2022 respondent/plaintiff and proceeded to pass the impugned judgment and decree in the suit in favour of the respondent/plaintiff against the appellant/defendant, who is before this Court by way of the present appeal. 7. At the outset, the learned counsel for the appellant/defendant (DW1), on instructions, submits that due to health grounds and on account of bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, the appellant/defendant could not tender herself for cross- examination as DW1 before the Trial Court nor contacted her advocate and give him necessary instructions to adduce oral or documentary evidence on her behalf. It is submitted that due to various problems/issues plaguing her, it was not possible for the appellant/defendant to give necessary instructions to her counsel to contest the suit further and submit arguments on merits as a result of which the Trial Court has proceeded to decree the suit based on the sole evidence of the respondent/plaintiff. It is submitted that the appellant/defendant has a good case on merit and she intends to tender herself for cross-examination and also adduce additional oral and documentary evidence, if required, in - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10628-DB RFA No. 100265 of 2022 support of her defence in addition to submitting arguments on merits and contesting the suit. It is therefore submitted that the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court may be set aside and the matter remitted back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh by providing opportunity to the appellant/defendant to tender herself for cross-examination as DW1 and also proceed further in the matter. 8. As stated earlier, the respondent/plaintiff having been served with notice of this appeal has chosen to remain unrepresented and has not contested the appeal. 9. The only point that arises for consideration in the present appeal is: i) Whether in the light of the submissions made on behalf of the appellant/defendant, the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court warrants interference in the present appeal? Reg. Point No.(i): 10. A perusal of the impugned judgment and decree will indicate that the Trial Court has noticed that the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10628-DB RFA No. 100265 of 2022 appellant/defendant did not tender herself for cross- examination and has come to the conclusion that the appellant/defendant did not establish the defence put forth by her in the suit. The Trial Court also noticed the fact that the documentary evidence produced by the respondent/plaintiff had not been challenged by the appellant/defendant and accordingly, proceeded to uphold the claim of the plaintiff and rejected the defence of the appellant/defendant. The Trial Court also noticed the fact that the arguments on merits were heard only on behalf of the respondent/plaintiff and not on behalf of the appellant/defendant or her counsel. Under these circumstances, in the light of the specific submission made on behalf of the appellant/defendant, the impugned judgment and decree is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law after providing one more opportunity to the appellant/defendant to tender herself for cross-examination as DW1 and also an opportunity to adduce further oral and documentary evidence, if any, we deem it just and proper to adopt a justice oriented approach in order to provide one more opportunity to the appellant/defendant especially when valuable proprietary - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10628-DB RFA No. 100265 of 2022 possessory rights over the immovable properties are involved in the suit. We deem it just and proper to set aside the impugned judgment and decree and remit the matter back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law after issuing certain directions. In the result we answer the above point (i) in favour of the appellant/defendant and pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed. ii) The impugned judgment and decree dated 06.11.2020 in O.S.No.82/2018 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gadag is hereby set aside and matter remitted back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. iii) The appellant/defendant is directed to appear before the Trial Court on 22.09.2025 without awaiting further notice from the Trial Court. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10628-DB RFA No. 100265 of 2022 iv) The Trial Court shall issue Court notice to the respondent/plaintiff and thereafter proceed further in the matter. v) The appellant/defendant shall tender herself for cross-examination on the date to be fixed by the Trial Court. vi) Liberty is reserved in favour of both the parties to adduce oral and documentary evidence in support of their respective claims, if so desired. vii) All rival facts and aspects of the matter are kept open. No opinion is expressed on merits or demerits of the rival contentions. Sd/- (S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE YAN CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17