Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 58895 (KAR)

SHRI. SADASHIV S/O. HALASIDDHA AGNEPPAGOL v. SHRI. MAYAPPA S/O. BHIMA AGNEPPAGOL

RFA/100488/2018 · 2025-11-07

B Muralidhara Pai, R Devdas

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15273-DB RFA No. 100488 of 2018 C/W RFA No. 100375 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI R.F.A. NO.100488 OF 2018 (SP) C/W. R.F.A. NO.100375 OF 2018 (SP) IN R.F.A. NO.100488 OF 2018 BETWEEN: SHRI SADASHIV S/O. HALASIDDHA AGNEPPAGOL, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KANKANWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI-591222. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. LAXMAN T. MANTAGANI, ADV. FOR SRI. NAGARAJ J. APPANNANAVAR, ADVOCATES) AND: SHRI MAYAPPA S/O. BHIMA AGNEPPAGOL, AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KANKANWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI-591222. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHABAZ A. QAZI, ADVOCATE) THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF C.P.C., PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN O.S.NO.123/2017 DATED 29.08.2018 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, RAIBAG, DIRECTING THE Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15273-DB RFA No. 100488 of 2018 C/W RFA No. 100375 of 2018 DEFENDANT TO EXECUTE A REGISTERED SALE DEED IN FAVOUR OF THE PLAINTIFF IN RESPECT OF THE SUIT SCHEDULE ‘A’ PROPERTIES BY ACCEPTING BALANCE SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS.50,000/- IN TERMS OF THE REGISTERED AGREEMENT OF SALE DEED DTD: 11-09-2014 AND ALLOW THE REGULAR FIRST APPEAL WITH COST THROUGHOUT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN RFA NO.100375 OF 2018 BETWEEN: SHRI MAYAPPA S/O. BHIMA AGNEPPAGOL, AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. KANKANWADI, PIN: 591222, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHABAZ A. QAZI, ADVOCATE; SRI. P. V. GUNJAL, ADVOCATE [NOC]) AND: SHRI SADASHIV S/O. BHIMA AGNEPPAGAL, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SANIKOPPA, PIN-591125, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. LAXMAN T. MANTAGANI, ADVOCATE) THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF C.P.C., READ WITH ORDER 41 OF C.P.C., PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN O.S. NO.123/2017 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, RAIBAG, DATED 29.08.2018, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15273-DB RFA No. 100488 of 2018 C/W RFA No. 100375 of 2018 SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29-08-2018 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, RAIBAG IN O.S. NO.123/2017, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS) 1. These two appeals arise out of the impugned judgment passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Raibag, in O.S. No.123/2017, and therefore, these two appeals were clubbed together and are now being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Both the plaintiff as well as the defendant have filed these appeals. 3. In the appeal filed by the defendant in RFA No.100375 of 2018, the ground raised by the appellant/defendant is that although the defendant had filed - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15273-DB RFA No. 100488 of 2018 C/W RFA No. 100375 of 2018 the written statement, he was not given sufficient opportunity to cross-examine the plaintiff’s witnesses. The defendant had also not entered the witness box, and no evidence was recorded on behalf of the defendant. Therefore, the learned counsel for the appellant/defendant submits that the judgment is required to be set aside and the matter should be remitted back to the Trial Court to afford an opportunity of hearing to the defendant. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff, although submitted that after filing the written statement, if the defendant has not shown any interest in pursuing the matter, no benefit can be given to the defendant, nevertheless, the learned counsel left it to the discretion of the Court to decide that if the matter requires reconsideration, the same may be done by levying appropriate costs on the defendant. 5. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and decree passed in O.S. No.123/2017 are set aside, while remanding the matter back to the Trial Court to afford an opportunity - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15273-DB RFA No. 100488 of 2018 C/W RFA No. 100375 of 2018 to the defendant by permitting them to cross-examine the witnesses of the plaintiff, and thereafter, permitting the defendant to examine themselves and be cross-examined by the plaintiff. 6. Consequently, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER I. The impugned judgment and decree passed in O.S. No.123/2017 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Raibag, are hereby set aside. II. The matter stands remitted back to the Trial Court to afford an opportunity to the defendant to cross-examine the witnesses of the plaintiff. At the same time, if any request is made by the plaintiff to lead additional evidence, the same shall also be permitted by the Trial Court. III. The parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 02.12.2025, without waiting for further notice. On - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15273-DB RFA No. 100488 of 2018 C/W RFA No. 100375 of 2018 the first date of hearing before the Trial Court, the defendant shall pay costs of ₹5,000/- to the plaintiff and thereafter proceed as directed by this Court. IV. The Office is directed to transmit the Trial Court records forthwith and also to refund the court fee in accordance with law. In view of the disposal of the appeals, all pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (R.DEVDAS) JUDGE Sd/- (B. MURALIDHARA PAI) JUDGE VB /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5