- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47861 CRP No. 816 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 816 OF 2024 (M) BETWEEN: SRI. K.S. VENKATACHALAPATHI (SINCE DEAD BY LRS) 1. SMT. MEENAKSHAMMA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS WIFE OF LATE K.S. VENAKTACHALAPATHI 2. SRI. B.V. MANJUNATHA SON OF LATE K.S. VENAKTACHALAPATHI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 3. SRI. K.V. MAHESH KUMAR SON OF LATE K.S. VENAKTACHALAPATHI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 4. SMT. K.V. SANGEETHA DAUGHTER OF LATE K.S. VENAKTACHALAPATHI AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS PETITIONERS NOS.1 TO 4 ARE R/O NO. NAGAVARA VILLAGE BY NAGAVARA VILLAGE, BYRAKURU HOBLI, MULBAGAL TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 131 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. KESHAV R. AGNIHOTRI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. K.C. VENUGOPAL S/O LATE K.S. VENAKTACHALAPATHI AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47861 CRP No. 816 of 2024 2. SRI. C. MANJUNATHA S/O LATE K.S. VENKATACHALAPATHI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS BOTH R1 AND R2 R/O KUDUGALLU VILLAGE, ROBERTSON HOBLI BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 131. 3. SMT. SULOCHANAMMA D/O K.S. VENAKATACHALAPATHI W/O VENAKTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/O GULPET, KOLAR CITY - 563 131. 4. SRI. JOHN NIKOLSON S/O AROGYASWAMY MAJOR, R/O KOLAR CITY - 563 131. 5. SRI. SHEIK ILYAS PASHA S/O SHEIK PASHA, MAJOR, R/O HAVELI MOHALLA KOLAR CITY - 563 131. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. L. NARASIMHA MURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS CRP FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 08.10.2021 PASSED IN MA.NO.17/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLAR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND FILED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.12.2018 PASSED IN MIS.NO.38/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KOLAR, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 19 OF CPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47861 CRP No. 816 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri.Keshav R. Agnihotri, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri.L.Narasihma Murthy, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2. 2. Revision petitioners are the appellants in RA No.195/2005 challenging the decree passed in O.S.No.438/2000 dated 17.03.2005 on the file of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kolar. 3. In the said Regular Appeal, the appellants did not prosecute the matter properly and therefore, it was dismissed for non-prosecution. 4. Seeking restoration of the said Regular Appeal, a Miscellaneous Petition came to be filed in Miscellaneous Petition No.38/2007. 5. Learned Judge who entertained the Miscellaneous Petition, allowed the said petition by order dated 19.12.2018 on payment of cost of Rs.8,000/-. However, the said cost was not - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47861 CRP No. 816 of 2024 paid as ordered by the Court within the stipulated time and as such, the appeal was not restored. 6. An appeal came to be filed by the revision petitioners in MA No.17/2019, which came to be dismissed by the First Appellate Court, whereby dismissal of RA No.195/2005 was confirmed. 7. Being aggrieved by the same, the revision petitioners are before this Court, in this revision. 8. Learned counsel for the revision petitioners, reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, contented that revision petitioners could not muster the sum of Rs.8,000/- cost for restoration of the Regular Appeal as per the order passed in Miscellaneous Petition No.38/2007 dated 19.12.2018. But they have complied the order over a period of time and on the ground of poverty, valuable rights in respect of the immovable property cannot be allowed to be defeated and sought for allowing the revision petition. 9. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the revision grounds by contending that valuable rights of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47861 CRP No. 816 of 2024 parties were settled long back and if the Regular Appeal is now sought to be restored, there would be hardship to the contesting respondents. 10. To meet such a contingency, imposing cost of Rs.5,000/- in addition to sum of Rs.8,000/- already paid by the revision petitioners over a period of time and directing the restoration of the Regular Appeal and further directing the First Appellate Court to dispose of the RA No.195/2005 in a time bound manner would meet the ends of justice. 11. Accordingly, following: ORDER i. Revision petition is allowed. ii. Regular Appeal No.195/2005 dated 14.08.2007 passed on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kolar is hereby directed to be restored on further cost of Rs.5,000/- (in addition to Rs.8,000/- already paid) on or before 08.12.2025. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47861 CRP No. 816 of 2024 iii. Parties shall appear before the First Appellate Court on 15.12.2025 without further notice and thereafter, learned Judge in the First Appellate Court shall dispose of the RA No.195/2005 expeditiously as possible but not later than 30.06.2026. iv. Payment of cost on or before 08.12.2025 is condition precedent for restoration of the appeal. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55