- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26622 RFA No. 2242 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.2242 OF 2018 (PAR/INJ) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. VARALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS D/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, 2. SMT. PILLAMMA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS W/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, 3. SMT. KRISHNAVENI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS D/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, 4. SMT. KUMARI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS W/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, ALL ARE RESIDING AT 2ND CROSS PALASANDRAM LAYOUT, KOLAR-563 101. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. B.M. KUSHALAPPA, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by V MANJUSHA BAI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26622 RFA No. 2242 of 2018 AND: 1. SMT. JAYAMMA D/O. LATE VENKATASWAMY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, 2. 2(a) SRI DASHARATHA S/O LATE VENKATASWAMY SINCE DEAD BY LR'S SMT. BHAGYAMMA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS W/O. LATE DASHARATHA R/AT #20, 7TH CROSS S.R. NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027. 3. SRI GANESH S/O LATE VENKATASWAMY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS GENERAL MANAGER, MSIL HOUSE, NO.36, KANNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE-560 062. 4. SRI NAGARAJU S/O LATE VENKATASWAMY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 5. SRI JYOTHIKUMAR S/O LATE VENKATASWAMY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 6. SRI RAJKUMAR S/O LATE VENKATASWAMY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26622 RFA No. 2242 of 2018 RESPONDENT NOS.1, 4, 5 AND 6 ARE RESIDING AT NO.20, 7TH CROSS, SAMPANGIRAMANAGARA BANGALORE-560 027. …RESPONDENTS (R.2: DECEASED NOTICE TO R.1, R.2(a), R.3, R.5, R.6 HELD SUFFICIENT BY WAY OF PAPER PUBLICATION; VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 13.11.2025 NOTICE TO R.4 IS HELD SUFFICIENT). THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., 1908, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY THE III ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, AT BANGALORE (CCH-25), IN O.S. NO.4736/2013, DATED 29.08.2018 BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY, ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26622 RFA No. 2242 of 2018 ORAL ORDER 1. The appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 29.08.2018 passed by the III Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City in O.S.No.4736/2013. 2. The appellants were the plaintiffs in the original suit. The suit is filed for partition, permanent injunction and mesne profits. It is submitted that the plaintiffs and defendants belong to the same family and that the suit schedule properties are joint family properties. It is further submitted that, by mistake and inadvertence, the plaintiffs failed to bring on record the legal representatives of deceased defendant no.2. Hence, the trial Court has dismissed the original suit on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties. It is submitted that the trial Court has not examined the merits of the case. It is further submitted that in the present appeal proceedings, the legal representatives of deceased - defendant No.2 / respondent No.2 have been brought on record. Hence, it - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26622 RFA No. 2242 of 2018 is prayed that the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.4736/2013 be set aside and the matter be remanded to the trial Court for fresh consideration. 3. Though the respondents have been duly served with notice of the appeal, they have remained unrepresented. 4. A perusal of the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.4736/2013 reveals that after recording the facts of the case in brief, the trial Court has dismissed the suit on the ground that after the death of defendant No.2, the plaintiffs did not take necessary steps to bring his legal representatives on record and the suit has been dismissed as against defendant No.2 as abated. That in a partition suit, if there is non-joinder of necessary parties, the suit is liable to be dismissed. The trial Court has not gone into the merits of the case and has not given any finding with regard to whether the properties are joint family properties and whether the plaintiffs are entitled to any share in the same. The case of the appellants is that, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26622 RFA No. 2242 of 2018 though no fault can be found in the impugned judgment, the interest of justice require that an opportunity be given to the appellants to correct their mistake by bringing all the necessary parties on record and prosecute the suit afresh before the trial Court. It is submitted that all the concerned parties are made parties to the proceedings in the present appeal. It is further submitted that the appellants would be satisfied if the impugned judgment and decree in O.S.No.4736/2013 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the trial Court for a fresh trial in accordance with law. 5. Under the given peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that interest of justice would be served if an opportunity is accorded to the appellants to prosecute the original suit by setting aside the impugned judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.4736/2013. Hence, the following:- - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26622 RFA No. 2242 of 2018 ORDER i. The appeal is allowed. ii. The judgment and decree dated 29.08.2018 passed by the Court of the III Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City in O.S.No.4736/2013 is hereby set aside. iii. The matter is remanded back to the trial Court. iv. The appellants are directed to appear before the trial Court without further notice on 03.08.2026. v. The appellants are at liberty to implead the legal representatives of the deceased respondent No.2 before the trial Court by making necessary application. vi. The trial Court shall issue fresh notice to the defendants (respondents herein) and to such other persons as the case as may be required - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26622 RFA No. 2242 of 2018 under law and thereafter, try the suit in accordance with law. vii. Registry is directed to send back the records to the trial Court. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE VMB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 12