- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48894 RSA No. 1209 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1209 OF 2025 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SUNDARAMMA, W/O LATE SANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS. 2. KUMARA, S/O LATE SANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. 3. RAMESHA, S/O LATE SANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. 4. SHIVAMMA, D/O LATE SANNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. ALL THE APPELLANTS ARE R/AT DODDABEKANAHALLI VILLAGE, KATTAYA HOBLI, KITTANE POST, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573212. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. VEERSHETTY B., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. NAVEEN J.N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CHENNAMMA, W/O LATE DEVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS. Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48894 RSA No. 1209 of 2025 2. KRISHNAMURTHY, S/O LATE DEVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. BOTH RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2 ARE RESIDING AT DODDABEKANAHALLI VILLAGE, KATTAYA HOBLI, KITTANE POST, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573212. 3. SHANTHAKUMARI, W/O CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS. 4. ANNAPURNA, W/O BASAVEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS. BOTH RESPONDENTS NO.3 AND 4 ARE RESIDING AT 1ST MAIN ROAD, V.B. LAYOUT, OPP. VINAYAKA HOSPITAL, SEETHA CIRCLE, BANK COLONY, BENGALURU - 560 085. …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.04.2022 PASSED IN R.A.NO.81/2018, ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HASSAN, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.02.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO.448/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HASSAN. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48894 RSA No. 1209 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the appellants on I.A.No.1/2025 for condonation of delay of 1,120 days in filing the appeal. 2. The learned counsel for the appellants brought to the notice of this Court the affidavit filed in support of the application, wherein the reasons are assigned in paragraph Nos.3, 4 and 5. Having perused paragraph No.3 of the affidavit, it is stated that R.A. was dismissed in the year 2022 and thereafter, FDP was filed and in the said FDP, there were negotiations being done for settlement. However, the matter was not settled between the parties and in view of compromise talk between the parties, did not take any steps to file the appeal before this Court and since the matter was not settled, decided to file the present appeal after arranging money from friends and relatives and hence, the delay has to be condoned. 3. Having taken note of the reasons assigned in the affidavit, it is not the case of the appellants that they were not having any knowledge about the judgment passed in R.A. The - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48894 RSA No. 1209 of 2025 only reason stated is that FDP was filed and they were negotiating for settlement, but not settled. No proper explanation is assigned to condone the delay of 1,120 days in filing the appeal and each day’s delay has to be explained. R.A. was disposed of on 05.04.2022 and the present appeal is filed on 28.07.2025. The reason assigned that they were negotiating for settlement, cannot be a ground to condone the delay. Apart from that, this appeal is filed against the concurrent finding. The Trial Court granted half share in the suit schedule properties in favour of the plaintiffs and the same is confirmed in the Appellate Court. When such being the case, I do not find any ground to condone the delay of 1,120 days in filing the appeal and hence, I.A.No.1/2025 is rejected. Consequently, the second appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12