- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31755 RSA No. 654 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 654 OF 2014 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: KASI NINGAMMA W/O BASAVANNYAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS. 1. SMT. GOURAMMA W/O MAHADEVAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS. 1(A). NAGARAJ S/O MAHADEVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O URANAHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: SORAB, DIST: SHIMOGA. 1(B). NAGARATHANA D/O MAHADEVAPPA W/O SHASHIDHAR, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O HIREJAMBURU - 577 428, TQ: SHIKARIPUR, DIST: SHIMOGA. 2. JAYALINGAPPA S/O BASAVANNYAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: HIREJAMBURU - 577 428, Digitally signed by C HONNUR SAB Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31755 RSA No. 654 of 2014 TQ: SHIKARIPUR, DIST: SHIMOGGA. 3. SMT. RAJESHWARI D/O BASAVANNYAPPA W/O LOKAPPA KOTRE AGE BY MAJOR OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/AT SHIRIGIMBI TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. S.B. HALLUR, ADVOCATE) AND: MALKAPPA S/O ADIVAPPA AGED BY MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O KODIKOPPA VILLAGE - 577 428 TQ: SHIKARIPUR, DIST: SHIMOGA. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. D BASAVARAJAPPA, ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED 31.10.2009 PASSED IN R.A.NO.433/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AND JMFC, SORABA, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.1.1996 PASSED IN O.S.NO.11/1986 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF AND JMFC., SHIKARIPUR. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31755 RSA No. 654 of 2014 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellants submits that despite of order dated 22.02.2024 to file better affidavit, he has not received any instructions from the appellants. 2. This appeal is of the year 2014 and there is a delay of 1519 days in filing the appeal. The suit is filed for relief of declaration and injunction and the same is decreed. 3. The defendants appeal is dismissed, hence the present second appeal is filed. 4. There is a delay of 1519 days in filing the second appeal. 5. The appellant has filed an affidavit stating that she is illiterate and was not aware of the implication of the procedural law. It is also stated that she could not arrange advocate's fee and other expenses. It is further stated that she was asked to bring the certified copies of documents - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31755 RSA No. 654 of 2014 when she approached the counsel to file an appeal before this Court and it is also stated that the appellant could not arrange hefty Court fee to file second appeal. 6. This Court vide order dated 22.02.2024 had directed the appellants to file a better affidavit. It is also relevant to note that on 22.02.2024, the learned counsel for the appellants has sought time to file better affidavit. Better affidavit is not yet filed. 7. It is also noticed that Court fee payable in respect of the present appeal is Rs.200/-. The grounds urged in the affidavit are not sufficient grounds to condone the delay of 1519 days in filing the appeal. 8. Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay of 1519 days is rejected. 9. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed, without entering into the merits. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7, CT: BHK