- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41202 CP No. 24 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL PETITION NO. 24 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. R PARAMANANDA SINGH S/O RAMAKRISHNA SINGH AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS R/AT NO. 12, 1ST MAIN 3RD CROSS, ASHWINI LAYOUT EJIPURA, BANGALORE - 560 047. 2. SMT. GAYATRHI SINGH W/O PARAMANANDA SINGH AGED 54 YEARS R/AT NO. 12, 1ST MAIN 3RD CROSS, ASHIWNI LAYOUT EJIPURA, BANGALORE - 560 047. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. JOSE SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LTD., HAVING HEAD OFFICE AT INDIABULLS HOUSE NO. 448-451, UDYOG VIHAR PHASE V, GURGOAN - 122 001, ALSO HAVING BRANCH OFFICE IN JATTI BUILDING NEAR JYOTHINIVAS COLLEGE INDUSTRIAL AREA KORMANGALA 5TH BLOCK Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41202 CP No. 24 of 2023 BANGALORE - 560 095. 2. M/S INDIA BULLS FINANCIAL SERVICE LTD., HAVING HEAD OFFICE AT INDIABULLS HOUSE NO 448-451, UDYOG VIHAR PHASE V, GURGOAN - 122 001 ALSO HAVING BRANCH OFFICE IN JATTI BUILDING NEAR JYOTHINIVAS COLLEGE INDUSTRIAL AREA, KORMANGALA 5TH BLOCK BANGALORE - 560 095. 3. SRI. DR THAMBAIAH SUNDARAM S/O LT COL THAMBAIAH AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT NO 910, NORTH EAST AVE SANTA MARIA CA 93454 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ALSO R/AT NO 61, 19TH CROSS B.K. NAGAR, YESHWANTHPURA BANGALORE - 560 022. 4. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY VIDHANASOUDHA, Dr. B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. HEMAVATHI A.T, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. CHINTAN CHINNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. BHOJEGOWDA T. KOLLER, AGA FOR R4; R2 AND R3 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 44 RULE 1 OF THE CPC, PRAYING TO PERMIT THE PETITIONERS TO PROSECUTE THE RFA NO. 896/2016 AS INDIGENT PERSON BY ALLOWING THIS CIVIL PETITION AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41202 CP No. 24 of 2023 ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEM MEET IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER The memo of the certified copy of the order sheet in RFA.No.896/2016 is filed by learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. Heard Sri.Jose Sabastian, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt.Hemavathy.A.T, counsel for Sri.Chinthan Chinnappa, learned counsel for the contesting respondent on I.A.No.1/2023. 3. The present civil petition is filed by the appellants in RFA No.896/2016 under Order XLIV Rule 1 of CPC with the following prayer: "WHEREFORE, the petitioners pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to permit the petitioners to prosecute the RFA.No.896/2016 as indigent person by allowing this Civil Petition and to pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deem meet in the interest of justice and equity." - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41202 CP No. 24 of 2023 4. There is a delay of 2476 days in filing the present Civil Petition. 5. I.A.No.1/2023 is filed seeking condonation of the huge delay of 2476 days in filing the present petition. The application is supported by Smt.Gayathri Singh, who is the 2nd petitioner in the present petition. 6. In the affidavit, it is stated that being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.3117/2013 dated 30.01.2016, an appeal came to be filed in RFA No.896/2016, which was filed in time. An application was filed along with the said appeal vide I.A.No.1 seeking leave of the Court to prosecute the said appeal as indigent persons by the appellants. However, no separate petition under Order XLIV Rule 1 of CPC was filed along with the appeal. Therefore, I.A.No.1/2016 came to be dismissed by order dated 04.06.2021. Three weeks' time was granted to the petitioners to do the needful. 7. However petitioners did not choose to file a separate petition seeking leave of the court after holding an enquiry that the appellants/petitioners were indigent persons - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41202 CP No. 24 of 2023 and again two weeks' time was granted on 01.07.2021. Petitioners for reasons best known to them, did not file a separate petition even then. By Order dated 10.02.2022, a further four weeks' time was granted, noting the request of the petitioners that the petitioner No.1 has suffered brain haemorrhage. 8. Even said opportunity was not utilized by the petitioners and by order dated 28.10.2022 there was a peremptory order passed granting four weeks' time to file a civil petition. Even after granting the final four weeks' time. There was no compliance in filing the separate petition seeking an order that petitioners are to be declared as indigent persons and to entertain the appeal, as appeal by an indigent persons. 9. Left with no alternative, on 30.11.2022, in the appeal further four weeks' time was granted as a last chance. The present petition came to be filed on 09.01.2023. 10. In the affidavit, learned counsel for petitioner No.2 has also stated that Division Bench of this Court which was dealing with RFA No.896/2016 granted time to file civil petition - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41202 CP No. 24 of 2023 in the regular format and therefore, the delay is to be condoned. 11. On perusal of the order sheet filed today, along with the memo, there is no such permission or liberty that has been granted by the Court. 12. All that is found from the records is repeatedly time was granted for the petitioners who were appellants to carry out necessary instructions to file a separate Civil Petition. Absolutely, no explanation whatsoever is forthcoming in the affidavit in support of I.A.No.1/2023 as to why the petitioners could not file the Civil Petition earlier soon after the order dated 04.06.2021. 13. A party to the proceedings cannot take advantage of his own wrong is the settled principles of law and when there is a prayer for condonation of huge delay of 2476 days in filing the present petition, the reasons must be satisfactory and sufficient reasons as is found under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41202 CP No. 24 of 2023 14. In the case on hand, the reasons assigned in the affidavit by petitioner No.2 in support of I.A.No.1/2023, does not contain any reasons whatsoever much less valid and sufficient reasons to condone the huge delay. 15. Taking advantage of the fact that Division Bench of this Court in RFA No.896/2016 has granted time and belated petition having delay of 2476 days cannot be condoned. 16. Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2023 is rejected. Consequently, the civil petition is also dismissed. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE rv,KAV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20 CT: BHK