- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15709 RSA No. 100730 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.100730 OF 2025 (PAR/POS) BETWEEN: 1. CHENNABASAPPA SANNABANGARAPPA SHETTALLI SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS., GANGADHAR CHENNABASAPPA SHETTALLI AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC. EMPLOYEE, R/O. GURUBHAVANA, MARKET ROAD, TQ. SIRSI, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581401. 2. MISS LALITA D/O. CHENNABASAPPA SHETTALLI, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. GURUBHAVANA, MARKET ROAD, TQ. SIRSI, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581401. 3. VINAYAK CHENNABASAPPA SHETTALLI AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC. EMPLOYEE, R/O. GURUBHAVANA, MARKET ROAD, TQ. SIRSI, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581401. 4. SMT. KAVITA W/O. MANJUNATH N, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. MUDDATANURU, TQ. SHIRAGUPPA, DIST. BALLARI-583121. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SAURABH SONDUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NALINI D/O. CHENNABASAPPA SHETTALLI, YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Date: 2025.11.19 11:50:09 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15709 RSA No. 100730 of 2025 AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. GADALLI CROSS, TQ. SIRSI, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581401. 2. DIVYABHARATI D/O. CHENNABASAPPA SHETTALLI, AGE: 18 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. GADALLI CROSS, TQ. SIRSI, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581401. 3. RAJASHEKHAR CHENNABASAPPA SHETTALLI AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC. AUTO DRIVER, R/O. TSS ROAD, TQ. SIRSI, DIST. UTTARAKANNADA-581401. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A.P. HEDGE, ADVOCATE AND SRI. VIJAY MALALI, ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.08.2025 PASSED BY I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, KARWAR (SITTING AT SIRSI) AT UTTARAKANNADA, IN RA NO.30/20112. CONSEQUENTLY, SET ASIDE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 09.06.2011 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, SIRSI IN OS NO.124/2007 AND DISMISS THE SUIT OF PLAINTIFFS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15709 RSA No. 100730 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI ) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the respondents. 2. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is “whether the First Appellate Court considered the three interim applications filed by the appellant before it under Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC seeking to produce several documents?” 3. The factual background necessary for this order is that Channabassappa is the defendant No.1. The plaintiffs claim that they are the daughters of Channabassappa born to his first wife-Nagaveni. The defendant No.1-Channabasappa contends that his only wife is one Shanta and Nagaveni is not related to him. The said suit came to be decreed in favour of the plaintiffs holding that they are the children born to Nagaveni through the defendant No.1. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed in R.A.No.30/2011. By the impugned judgment, the appeal came to be dismissed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15709 RSA No. 100730 of 2025 4. In the meanwhile, the defendant No.1 died during the pendency of the appeal before the First Appellate Court and the appellant No.1(A) to 1(D) came on record saying that they are the children born to one Shanta, who was stated to be the only wife of the defendant No.1. 5. The appellants had filed three applications under Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC seeking to produce certain documents, which would show that the wife of Channabasappa was Shanta only. These applications filed by the appellants were not considered by the First Appellate Court while dealing with R.A.No.30/2011. 6. A perusal of the judgment of the First Appellate Court would clearly indicate that no such application was considered by it. The certified copy of the application filed under Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC is produced and it is a cardinal principle of law that any application filed under Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC has to be considered along with the main appeal. Obviously, the judgment of the First Appellate Court does not show that such applications filed were considered by it. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15709 RSA No. 100730 of 2025 7. Though the learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the applications should have been considered by the First Appellate Court, but he opposes the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants on the ground that those applications do not have any bearing on the merits of the case. 8. I am unable to accept this argument for the simple reason that when the matter relates to the relationship of the parties with the defendant No.1-Channabasappa, it cannot be said that those applications had no relevance. If at all the said applications were considered by the First Appellate Court, definitely whether those documents were relevant for the just decision in the matter or not could have been considered. Moreover, the question whether the appellants could file such an application under Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC and whether it comes within the four corners of Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC is also not considered by the First Appellate Court. 9. In that view of the matter, the impugned judgment has to be set aside and the matter has to be remanded to the First Appellate Court with a direction to the First Appellate Court - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15709 RSA No. 100730 of 2025 to consider the applications filed under Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC on merits along with the appeal and then render its judgment in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. 10. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the case and the judgment of the First Appellate Court. 11. In view of disposal of the appeal, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of. SD/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE YAN CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 38