- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46612 RP No. 360 of 2024 C/W RP No. 358 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REVIEW PETITION NO.360 OF 2024 IN REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.217/2018 (POS) C/W REVIEW PETITION NO.358 OF 2024 IN REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.218/2018 (INJ) IN RP NO.360/2024: BETWEEN: 1. SRI. A.K. VISWANATH GOWDA, S/O LATE SRI. KALE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, COFFEE PLANTER, RESIDING AT AVATHI VILLAGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK-577101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PARASMAL B @ PARAS JAIN AND SRI. G.P.JAGADISH, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. SRI. I.R. ARUN KUMAR @ ERA GOWDA, S/O LATE SRI. RUDRE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, 7TH ADVENTIST SCHOOL ROAD, BASAVANAHALLI, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577101. 2. SRI. C.S. LAKSHMIKANTHA, S/O LATE SRI. SIDDALINGAIAH, Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46612 RP No. 360 of 2024 C/W RP No. 358 of 2024 AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1, II CROSS, LINGAPPA BLOCK, THIMMAIAH GARDEN, BENGALURU-560024. 3. SMT. TULASI, W/O SRI. C.S. LAKSHMIKANTHA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1, II CROSS, LINGAPPA BLOCK, THIMMAIAH GARDEN, BENGALURU-560024. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SWAROOP SRINIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 03.07.2025, NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 (a) OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE JUDGMENT PASSED IN RSA NO.217/2018 (POS), DATED 14.06.2024. IN RP NO.358/2024: BETWEEN: 1. SRI. A.K. VISWANATH GOWDA, S/O. LATE SRI. KALE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, COFFEE PLANTER, RESIDING AT AVATHI VILLAGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK-577101. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. PARASMAL B @ PARAS JAIN AND SRI. G.P.JAGADISH, ADVOCATES) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46612 RP No. 360 of 2024 C/W RP No. 358 of 2024 AND: 1. SRI. I.R. ARUN KUMAR @ ERA GOWDA, S/O. LATE SRI RUDRE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, 7TH ADVENTIST SCHOOL ROAD, BASAVANAHALLI, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577101. 2. SRI C.S. LAKSHMIKANTHA, S/O. LATE SRI SIDDALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1, II CROSS, LINGAPPA BLOCK, THIMMAIAH GARDEN, BENGALURU-560024. 3. SMT. TULASI, W/O. SRI C.S. LAKSHMIKANTHA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1, II CROSS, LINGAPPA BLOCK, THIMMAIAH GARDEN, BENGALURU-560024. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SWAROOP SRINIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 03.07.2025, NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 (a) OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE JUDGMENT PASSED IN RSA NO.218/2018 (INJ) DATED 14.06.2024. THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46612 RP No. 360 of 2024 C/W RP No. 358 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for respondent No.1. 2. These two review petitions are filed against the order passed in R.S.A.No.218/2018 c/w R.S.A.No.217/2018 praying this Court to review the order dated 14.06.2024. 3. This Court having considered the factual aspects of the case and also considering the material on record in detail, dismissed both the second appeals and hence, the present review petitions are filed before this Court. 4. The main contention urged before this Court is that a valid GPA was executed by Sri I.R. Arun Kumar @ Eragowda and the same was duly notarized before the notary public. The execution of the GPA was confirmed by the forensic expert opinion that signature on the GPA is that of Eragowda. The advocate, who has drafted the GPA led the evidence and stated that GPA was drafted by him at the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46612 RP No. 360 of 2024 C/W RP No. 358 of 2024 instance of Eragowda and he has signed the GPA and GPA contains two signatures of Eragowda. The material is available on record. The learned Trial Judge in his judgment in paragraph No.46 holds that it is proved before the Court that Ex.P.12 power of attorney has been executed by the defendant and he put his signature for the same and it is stated that the plaintiff has also proved the execution of Ex.P.12 GPA. When GPA has been duly proved that it has been executed by Eragowda, holding the sale deeds executed on 06.05.1997 and 07.05.1997 as null and void, is erroneous and perverse finding. 5. In these review petitions grounds urged are with regard to the Trial Judge further erred in holding at paragraph No.92 of the judgment that the sale deeds are not genuine, without any material on record to say so. It is settled law that title passes on registration of the sale deed. The right of possession over the property is a facet of title. As soon as deed of sale is registered, in terms of the sale deed the vendor has to deliver possession of the property sold. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46612 RP No. 360 of 2024 C/W RP No. 358 of 2024 6. Having perused the grounds, which have been urged in the review petitions, it is in respect of an error committed by the Trial Judge while considering the material on record. This Court vide order dated 14.06.2024 considered all these aspects in paragraph Nos.7, 8, 9 and 10 and in order to invoke the review jurisdiction, nothing is urged in the grounds of review petition i.e., an error apparent on the face of the record. When such being the case, the question of this Court once again sitting on the appeal having considered the grounds, which have been urged in the review petition does not arise. The question of invoking the review jurisdiction does not arise and there is no mistake apparent on the record and all the grounds, which have been urged before this Court was considered while disposing of the second appeals. The learned counsel for the review petitioner has not made out any ground to invoke the review jurisdiction and the grounds which have been urged in the review petitions are against an error committed by the Trial Judge while considering the matter on merits and not urged any ground with regard to invoking of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46612 RP No. 360 of 2024 C/W RP No. 358 of 2024 review jurisdiction and hence, no grounds are made out to review the order of this Court dated 14.06.2024. 7. Hence, both the review petitions are dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31