- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49443 RSA No. 376 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.376 OF 2025 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. NAGARATHNA W/O PUTTARAMU AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS 2. SRI. BALAKRISHNA S/O PUTTARAMU AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS 3. SRI. BALASUBRAMANYA S/O PUTTARAMU AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 4. SRI. NARAYANA S/O PUTTARAMU AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS APPELLANTS NO.1 TO 4 ARE RESIDING AT MARIGUDIBEEDI, GANJAM, SRIRANGAPATNA TOWN-571 438. 5. SMT. HEMAMALINI D/O PUTTARAMU W/O MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT NO.61/1, 2ND CROSS, KALIDASA ROAD, ONTIKOPPALU MYSURU- 570 002. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SRINIVAS V., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49443 RSA No. 376 of 2025 AND: 1. SMT. PUTTAMMA W/O LATE PUTTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS 2. PAVITHRA W/O LATE ANAND AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 3. NANDAN S/O LATE ANAND AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS 4. SRI. SHANKAR S/O LATE PUTTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT OLEKUYYUVABEEDI GANJAM, SRIRANGAPATNA TOWN MANDYA DISTRICT -571 438. …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.12.2024 PASSED IN R.A.NO.24/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, SRIRANGAPATTANA, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2024 PASSED IN FDP.NO.5/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SRIRANGAPATTANA, ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 54 OF CPC. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49443 RSA No. 376 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT This matter is listed for admission. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants. 2. The only ground urged before this Court in this second appeal is that Commissioner submitted the report bifurcating the property and in the property which is allotted in favour of the appellants, electric line passes through and the same is the grievance of the appellants herein. Hence, this Court has to issue notice to the respondents and the same has not been considered by the Trial Court as well as the First Appellate Court. 3. Having perused the records, it discloses that suit was filed in the year 1993 in O.S.No.474/1993 and an appeal was filed in R.A.No.95/2000. The said appeal was also dismissed and thereafter R.S.A. was filed before this Court in R.S.A.No.1300/2000 and the same was also dismissed. Ultimately, F.D.P was filed before the Trial Court in F.D.P.No.5/2006, wherein the Commissioner was appointed and Commissioner has submitted the report. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49443 RSA No. 376 of 2025 4. The main contention of learned counsel for the appellants is that electric line passes through in the land belonging to the appellants and the fact that appellants are squatting on the property and even not ready to give share in favour of the plaintiff is not in dispute. The appellants are in enjoyment of the property from 1993 and almost 32 years have been elapsed and the reason for approaching the First Appellate Court in R.A. No.24/2024 is also with regard to electric line. The First Appellate Court also taken note of Commissioner report and in paragraph Nos.15 and 16 discussed that in the Commissioner report not stated anything about passing of electric line and also in paragraph No.17 comes to the conclusion that land of 1 acre 20 guntas was divided as per the preliminary decree passed in O.S.No.474/1993 and also an observation is made that only with an intention to protract the proceedings, the said ground is taken. When such being the case, I do not find any ground to admit the second appeal and frame any substantial question of law. 5. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49443 RSA No. 376 of 2025 ORDER The regular second appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36