- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15120 RP No. 226 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REVIEW PETITION NO. 226 OF 2016 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. RAMAKKA W/O K.P.HANUMAPPA AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS 2. SRI. P.H. NAGARAJA S/O K.P. HANUMAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS (SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY HIS LRS) 2(A). SMT. S. KAMALA W/O LATE P.H. NAGARAJA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 2(B). SRI. T.N. HARISH GOWDA S/O LATE P.H. NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 2(C). SRI. T.N. GIRISH GOWDA S/O LATE P.H. NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS (A) TO (C) ARE RESIDENTS OF NO. 1418 SRI. RAMA NILAYA, KATARIPALYA KOLAR TALUK - 563 101. 2(D). SMT. SAVITHA W/O RAMAKRISHNAPPA G TAMBIHALLI, KOLAR - 563 101. Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15120 RP No. 226 of 2016 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VEERANNA G. TIGADI, ADVOCATE FOR PETITONERS AND ALSO FOR P2(A TO D)) AND: 1. SRI. T.V. MUNIYAPPA S/O VENKATASWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 2. T.V.CHENGAPPA S/O VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 3. T.K. NAGARAJ S/O KANAKAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 4. SRI. T.V. VENKATASWAMAPPA SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY HIS LRS 3. SRI. T.H. RAMACHANDRA S/O K.P. HANUMAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 4. SRI. T.H. VENKATACHALAPATHY S/O K.P. HANUMAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 5. SRI. T.H. RAMAIAH S/O K.P.HANUMAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS (ALL RESIDING AT THAMBIHALLY VILLAGE HUTHUR HOBLI, KOLAR) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15120 RP No. 226 of 2016 4(A). SRI. T.V. VENKATACHALAPATHI S/O T.M. VENKATASHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 4(B). SRI. T.V. ANANDA S/O T.M. VENKATASHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 4(C). SMT. RATHNAMMA W/O T.M. VENKATASHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 4(D). SMT. SANDHYAVATHI S/O T.M. VENKATASHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF THIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE HUTHU HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK & DISTRICT - 563 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAVI H.K, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 17/09/2014 PASSED IN RSA NO. 148/2011, ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15120 RP No. 226 of 2016 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER This review petition takes exception to the order dated 17.09.2014 passed in RSA No.148 of 2011 whereby the said appeal filed by the respondents was allowed by this Court. 2. Heard Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner / plaintiff - late K. P. Hanumappa instituted a suit in OS No.102/2007 against the respondents / defendants for permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable property. The said suit was having been contested by the respondents /defendants, the Trial Court proceeded to pass a judgment and decree dated 25.08.2010 dismissing the suit filed by the said late K. P. Hanumappa against the respondents / defendants. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the plaintiff - late K. P. Hanumappa preferred an appeal in RA No.146/2010, which was allowed by the First Appellate Court vide judgment and decree dated 29.11.2010, under which, the First Appellate Court set aside - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15120 RP No. 226 of 2016 the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court and decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff against the respondents /defendants. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court, the respondents /defendants approached this Court in the instant RSA No.148/2011 in which, the aforesaid late K. P. Hanumappa was arrayed as the sole respondent. By final judgment and decree dated 17.09.2014, this Court allowed the said RSA No.148/2011 and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court and restored the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, thereby dismissing the suit filed by the aforesaid late K. P. Hanumappa against the respondents /defendants. 4. Subsequently, the review petitioners herein who are the wife and children of the said late K. P. Hanumappa have preferred the present review petition inter alia contending that during the pendency of the aforesaid appeal in RSA No.148/2011, the aforesaid plaintiff K.P. Hanumappa expired on 10.01.2013 and the review petitioners herein were not in a position to bring to the notice of their learned counsel about the demise of the late K. P. Hanumappa and as such, this Court - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15120 RP No. 226 of 2016 proceeded to dispose of the said appeal on the erroneous premise that late K. P. Hanumappa was alive as on the date of the final judgment and decree dated 17.09.2014, which is factually incorrect inasmuch as the aforesaid late K. P. Hanumappa had expired on 10.01.2013 itself, as can be seen from the death certificate, produced at Annexure - B along with a memorandum of review petition. 5. Under these circumstances, the review petitioners are before this Court interalia contending that the said final judgment and decree passed by this Court in RSA No.148/2011 dated 17.09.2014 without taking note of the demise of the sole respondent, late K. P. Hanumappa was a nullity and non est and the same deserves to be set-aside and the appeal would be restored to the file of this Court. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the review petitioner No.2 - P. H. Nagaraja, who was examined as PW1 and had given evidence on behalf of his father late K.P. Hanumappa and had deliberately/intentionally not brought to the notice of his learned counsel or to this Court about the demise of his father and as such, the review petitioners are not entitled to any relief in the present review - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15120 RP No. 226 of 2016 petition, which does not contain any error apparent on the face of the record warranting interference by this Court in the present review petition, which is liable to be dismissed. 7. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that as stated supra, the death certificate issued by the Chief Registrar of Births and Deaths confirming the demise of late K.P. Hanumappa on 10.01.2013. As can be seen from the aforesaid death certificate, late KP Hanumappa expired on 10.01.2013 during the pendency of RSA No.148/2011. In this context, it is also pertinent to note that the order sheet maintained by this Court in RSA No.148/2011 also does not indicate that the learned counsel for the respondents therein i.e., late K. P. Hanumappa had reported the demise of late K. P.Hanumappa and this Court proceeded on the erroneous premise that late K. P. Hanumappa, who was the sole respondent in the appeal was alive and listed the matter and reserved the matter for orders on 05.07.2014, on which date, late K. P. Hanumappa had already expired. 8. Even after the matter was reserved by this Court on 05.09.2014, the demise of late K. P. Hanumappa had not been - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15120 RP No. 226 of 2016 intimated to this Court by the learned counsel for the respondents. 9. It follows there from that as on the date of the judgment and decree dated 17.09.2014, late K. P. Hanumappa had expired. As a result of which, the final judgment and decree dated 17.09.2014 passed in relation to a dead person i.e., the aforesaid late K. P. Hanumappa, who had already expired by then, is clearly a nullity and non-est in the eye of law. 10. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is clear that the final judgment and decree, which is under review in the present review petition has been passed as against late K.P. Hanumappa, who was dead as on the date of the final judgment and decree, thereby rendering the final judgment and decree or nullity void-ab-initio and non-est in the eye of law warranting interference by this Court in the present petition. ORDER (i) Review petition is hereby allowed. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15120 RP No. 226 of 2016 (ii) The final judgment and decree dated 17.09.2014 passed in RSA No.148/2011 is hereby set aside and the same is restored to the file. (iii) The review petitioners who are the wife and children of late K.P.Hanumappa are treated as legal representatives of late K.P. Hanumappa, the sole respondent in RSA No.148/2011. (iv) The respondents herein are directed to carry out amendment in RSA No.148/2011, showing the review petitioners as the LRs of late K.P. Hanumappa, the sole respondent and file amended cause title by the next date of hearing. (v) Re-list for final hearing on 17.04.2026. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5