- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47587 RSA No. 1519 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1519 OF 2024 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. LINGAMMA W/O H.R. KOTEKALLAPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT HALETHIMMANAHALLI PURVA HOBLI MADHUGIRI TALUK …APPELLANT (BY SRI. HARISH H V.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. KOTAMMA W/O LATE B.N. VEERANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS 2. B.V. RAMAIAH S/O LATE B.N. VEERANAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/AT BHAKTHARAHALLI KORATAGERE TALUK KASABA HOBLI. 3. NAGABHUSHANA S/O LATE B.N. VEERANAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS NOW WORKING AT SIDDAGANGA ELEMENTARY MIDDLE SCHOOL B.H. ROAD, TUMAKURU. Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47587 RSA No. 1519 of 2024 4. B.N. VIJAYKUMAR S/O LATE B N VEERANAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS 5. SMT. MUDDANAGAMMA W/O ASWATHAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT JADEGONDANAHALLI KASABA HOBLI MADHUGIRI TALUK. 6. SMT. SIDDAGANGAMMA W/O B.N. GOVINDARAJU AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS R/AT BEHIND T.V.V. COLELGE MADHUGIRI HINDUPUR ROAD MADHUGIRI TOWN. 7. SMT. RAJAMMA W/O RAMAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 8. SMT. YASHODAMMA W/O LINGARAJU AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS RA/T BHAKTHARAHALLI KASABA HOBLI KORATAGERE TALUK. RESPONDENTS NO.1, 4 AND 7 ARE R/AT HALETHIMMANAHALLI PURAVARA HOBLI, MADHUGIRI TALUK. …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.01.2022 PASSED IN RA.NO.42/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MADHUGIRI, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.07.2017 PASSED IN OS.No.186/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUGE AND JMFC, MADHUGIRI. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47587 RSA No. 1519 of 2024 THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT This Court heard the matter on the previous date of hearing on 04.11.2025 and having considered the averments made in the affidavit in paragraph No.3, wherein it is sworn to that her husband developed gangrene and it took nearly 1½ year to 2 years for its cure and she was also suffering from joint pain due to dengue fever and hence, could not file the affidavit, this Court directed to place on record the medical records of her husband, who was suffering from gangrene. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo along with two documents, one document dated 25.05.2023 issued by Administrative Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Gondhihalli, Madhugiri Taluk which discloses that he has suffered cut-lacerated wound over left leg first finger and no other significant injury and patient is stable. This document is also after 1½ year of the judgment passed by the First Appellate Court and another document is Medical - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47587 RSA No. 1519 of 2024 Certificate dated 14.11.2025, wherein also it shows that he took treatment from 25.05.2023 to 10.06.2023 and advised him to take rest and this document is without corollary to the first document which discloses that it is a self-fall and suturing was done. Having taken note of these two documents, the said documents will not come to the aid of appellant in support of the averments made in the affidavit in paragraph No.3. The judgment was passed on 03.01.2022 and this appeal was filed on 24.10.2024. 3. Having considered the material on record, the First Appellate Court allowed the appeal and granted the relief in respect of plaintiff and defendant granting 1/8th share in the suit ‘A’ schedule item No.4 and suit ‘B’ schedule item Nos.1 to 16, 18 and land measuring 1 acre 18 guntas in suit item No.19 properties by way of partition and separate possession. It is also not the case of the appellant that she was not having the knowledge about order passed by the First Appellate Court and though she was having the knowledge, the reason assigned in the affidavit is that her husband was suffering from gangrene and the first document produced along with the memo shows - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47587 RSA No. 1519 of 2024 that it was a self-fall and he sustained injury which is also after 1½ year of passing the order by the First Appellate Court and no explanation for the delay caused from the date of passing the order till the husband sustained injury after 1½ year. 4. Hence, I do not find any ground to condone the delay of 878 days in filing the appeal. It is settled law that each day delay must be explained properly and without showing sufficient cause for the delay caused, question of condoning the delay of 878 days does not arise. Therefore, no ground is made out to condone the delay of 878 days in filing the appeal. Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2024 is rejected. Consequently, the regular second appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10