- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51525 CRP No. 155 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 155 OF 2023 (IO) BETWEEN: 1. MR GOPALA AMIN S/O LATE KORAPOLU @ RAJEEVI AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/A DODDIKATTE, PARARI HOUSE, BAJPE VILLAGE AND POST, MANGALURU TALUK - 575 001 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. UDAYA PRAKASH M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT LOLAKSHI W/O RUKKAYYA POOJARY, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/A AMBELABETTU HOUSE, KELINJAR VILLAGE KUPPEPADAV POST, MANGALORE TALUK D.K. - 575 001 2. SMT PRABHAVATHI W/O SRI GOPALAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT MADAVU HOUSE AND POST PUTTUR D.K. - 575 001 Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51525 CRP No. 155 of 2023 3. SMT PREMA @ PREMALATHA W/O CHANDRAHAS POOJARY AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/A ULIATHADKA SALETHOOR POST, BANTWAL TALUK - 574 211 4. SRI MOHANDAS S/O SRI MANJAPPA POOJARY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT DODDIKATTE, PARARI HOUSE, BAJPE POST MANGALURU TALUK - 575 001 5. SMT KUSUMAKSHI D/O LATE KORAPOLU @ RAJEEVI AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, 6. SMT KAMALAKSHMI D/O LATE KORAPOLU @ RAJEEVI W/O LINGAPPAKOTIAN @ KARIYA POOJARY, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT INA HOUSE, KULAVOOR VILLAGE, KUPPEPADAVU POST, MANGALURU TALUK - 575 001 7. SMT SULOCHANI D/O LATE KORAPOLU @ RAJEEVI W/O LATE NARAYANA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, 8. SRI VIJAY AMIN S/O LATE KORAPOLU @ RAJEEVI AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51525 CRP No. 155 of 2023 R5, 7 AND 8 ARE R/A DODDIKATTE PARARI HOUSE, BAJPE POST MANGALURU TALUK - 575 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY G., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3 SRI. M. CHIDANANDA KEDILAYA, ADVOCATE FOR R4 R5 - KUSUMAKSHI SERVED R6 - KAMALAKSHI SERVED R7 - SULOCHANI SERVED R8 - VIJAY AMIN SERVED) THIS CRP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 09.02.2023 PASSED ON I.A.NO.IV IN RA 25/1998 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MANGALURU D.K, ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.IV FILED UNDER SECTIONS 5 AND 14 OF LIMITATION ACT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER 1. Heard Sri. Uday Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Ravishankar Shastry G., learned counsel for the respondents. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51525 CRP No. 155 of 2023 2. Sixth respondent in R.A. No.25/1998 is the revision petitioner challenging the order passed by the First Appellate Court on the IA filed under Section read with Section 14 of the Limitation Act. 3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present revision petition are as under ; 3.1 Respondents No.1 to 3 filed separate suit in O.S. No.124/2009 seeking setting aside the compromise entered into in R.A. No.25/1998. Maintainability of the said suit was decided by this Court in WP No.29044/2014 and the respondents No.1 to 3 in the R.A. No.25/1998 were directed to approach the very same Court by filing an application seeking setting aside of the compromise decree and appeal to be heard on merits with subject to all exceptions meaning thereby the rights of the parties. 3.2 Such an application was filed by respondents No.1 to 3 in R.A. No.25/1998. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51525 CRP No. 155 of 2023 3.3 Pertinently, the office has raised objection with regard to the application on account of delay and therefore respondents No.1 to 3 filed an application under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Limitation Act. 3.4 The said application was opposed by the revision petitioner and learned Trial Judge by impugned order allowed the application. 4. Being aggrieved by the same, sixth respondent is before this Court challenging the validity of the said order. 5. Sri Uday Prakash, learned counsel for the revision petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the revision petition vehemently contented that the conduct of respondents No.1 to 3 keeping quiet for a huge period of time and then decide to file a suit for setting aside the compromise decree, exposes the hollowness in the claim of the respondents No.1 to 3 in R.A. No.25/1998 and the application filed seeking condonation of delay supported - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51525 CRP No. 155 of 2023 by false affidavit has not been properly appreciated by the Trial Judge and allowed the application resulting in miscarriage of justice and sought for allowing the revision petition. 6. Per contra, Sri. Ravishankar Shastry supports the impugned order. 7. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court noted that to file a petition seeking setting aside of the compromise decree, there was no necessity to file an application under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Limitation Act. 8. The filing of the earlier suit which got culminated in the aforesaid writ petition and thereafter filing the application before the First Appellate Court in R.A. No.25/1998 is borne out of records. 9. Under such circumstances, all that the contesting respondents were required to do is to urge as a ground about the delay and latches exposing the conduct - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51525 CRP No. 155 of 2023 of the applicants who are party to the compromise and oppose the said application on merits and not on the question of delay. 10. In fact, under the Limitation Act, there is no limitation prescribed for an application to be filed seeking setting aside of the compromise decree. 11. Therefore, filing an application under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Limitation Act by the contesting respondents in this revision who are respondents No.1 to 3 in R.A. No.25/1998 itself was a surplusage on record. 12. Be it what it may, since the application is now allowed, the conduct of the applicants namely respondents No.1 to 3 in R.A. No.25/1998 shall be considered on its merit by the Trial Court, uninfluenced by the reasons recorded in the impugned Order, when the same is opposed on merits. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51525 CRP No. 155 of 2023 13. With that observation, the following : ORDER Civil Revision Petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SNC ct:SG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38