- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30874 RFA No. 733 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.733 OF 2023 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. JAYAMMA W/O LATE PATEL DODDAVEEREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, 2. MR. VEEREGOWDA S/O LATE PATEL DODDAVEEREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT KACHUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, SATHANUR HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DIST-562120. 3. SMT. SUKANYA W/O MR. PUTTAMARIGOWDA, D/O LATE PATEL DODDAVEEREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT MALAGALU, KANAKAPURA TOWN, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562117. 4. SMT. PREMA W/O MR. MADEGOWDA, D/O LATE PATEL DODDAVEEREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT YATTAMBADI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571430. 5. SMT. BEBI W/O MR. PUTTASIDDEGOWDA, D/O LATE PATEL DODDAVEEREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT SHIVANEGOWDANADODDI VILLAGE, Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30874 RFA No. 733 of 2023 KODIHALLI HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DIST-562119. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI KESHAVA MURTHY B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. CHIKKEEREGOWDA S/O LATE KENCHA VEEREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, 2. SMT. LINGAMMA W/O LATE KANDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, 3. MR. KENCHE GOWDA S/O LATE KANDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, 4. SMT. PRATHIMA W/O MR. ESHWARA, D/O LATE KANDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 5. MR. KUMARA S/O LATE KANDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 6. SMT. SANNAMMA W/O MR. KABBALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 7. SMT. SHIVARATHNAMMA W/O MR. SHIVASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT KACHUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, SATHANUR HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562120. …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO R-1 TO R-7 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30874 RFA No. 733 of 2023 THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.02.2014 PASSED IN O.S.NO.193/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, RAMANAGARA, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING – INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL JUDGMENT The present appeal by the defendants assailing the judgment and decree dated 01.02.2014 passed in O.S.No.193/2010 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Ramanagara (‘the Trial Court’ for short), whereby, the suit of the plaintiff seeking partition and separate possession was decreed. 2. The said appeal is accompanied by I.A.No.1/2023 seeking to condone the inordinate delay of 2542 days in preferring the present appeal. 3. Heard Sri B. Keshava Murthy, learned counsel for the appellants and perused the records. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30874 RFA No. 733 of 2023 4. In support of the application in I.A.No.1/2023, an affidavit is sworn in by one Sri Veeregowda, s/o late Patel Doddaveeregowda, appellant No.2 in the present appeal. The relevant portion of the affidavit is culled out and extracted hereunder: “4) I state that upon framing of issues the Respondent No.1 herein led evidence and produced the documents which were marked as Ex.P1 to P26. There was no cross examination of PW-1 and no defense evidence was led, no argument from the defense side, as such the trial court decreed the suit 01.02.2014 decreeing the suit in part. 5) I state that after filing written statement their was no progress in the case and was not aware about the setting down of the matter for cross examination, defense evidence and also posting the matter for Argument and also passing of ex-parte judgement dated 01.02.2014. 6) I state that the Respondent No.1 filed the Petition for Final Decree proceedings in FDP No.07/2022 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Kanakapura ordered to issue notice on 02.06.2022 returnable by 27.09.2022. Upon - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30874 RFA No. 733 of 2023 receipt of notice in the Final Decree proceedings, made appearance on 27.09.2022 and ordered to list the above said matter on 31.01.2023. 7) I state that soon after receipt of summons in FDP Proceedings, I have advised to obtain the certified copies of judgement and decree dated 01.02.2014 passed by the trial Court and certified copies made available to me on 19.09.2022. As there was financial constrains for legal expenses, I have arranged and filed the above Appeal. 8) I state that, the judgement and decree passed by the trial court is virtually is an ex-parte decree, without giving reasonable opportunity to contest the matter. The delay in preferring the above Appeal is due to not knowing of the judgement and decree passed by the trial court as the same was not brought to our knowledge by our respective Advocates before the trial court.”. 5. The reasons mentioned in the affidavit does not appraise the conscious of this Court more particularly for unexplained delay from 01.02.2014 to 2023. In the present appeal, there is an inordinate delay of more than - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30874 RFA No. 733 of 2023 six years. Except for a bald statement regarding financial difficulty, no material or particulars are placed to explain the period from 01.02.2014 to 01.04.2023. The appellants-defendant Nos.1 to 5 were represented by counsel before the Trial Court and contested the suit by filing written statement. However, they did not adduce any evidence nor cross-examine PW.1. Consequently, the evidence of PW.1-remained unchallenged and rebutted. In paragraph No.6 of the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.1/2023, it is stated that they came to know of the decree only when the notice in FDP No.7/2022 was served upon them and they entered appearance thereafter. This explanation is not acceptable for the sole reason that the defendants had participated in the trial, atleast to the extent of filing their written statement and the judgment was pronounced on 01.02.2014 while they were represented through counsel. Having been aware of the decree passed against them, they cannot contend that they acquired knowledge of the judgment only upon - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30874 RFA No. 733 of 2023 receipt of the notice in final decree proceedings. The reasons assigned are not appraisable and the appeal is to be dismissed on the ground of delay and latches. It is well settled position of law that the existence of "sufficient cause" to the satisfaction of the Court is the condition set for the Court to exercise its discretion in the matter of condoning delay. In the circumstances, the cause stated in the affidavit cannot said to be bonafide or sufficient cause. Despite the delay, this Court has examined the appeal on merits to ensure justice is not denied on ground of limitation. There is no merit in the appeal as well. 6. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay for having not made out sufficient cause to condone inordinate delay of 2542 days as well as on merits. Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2023 is dismissed. Sd/- ______________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 54