Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010194782025 NC: 2026:KHC:47682 RSA No. 458 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 458 OF 2025 (PAR) BETWEEN: SHIVAMMA W/O ANJANREDDY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT B.K HALLI VILLAGE, NAGALAMADIKE HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK - 572 136. …APPELLANT (BY MS. PRUTHVI G.R, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. KRISHNA NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. HANUMAKKA W/O LATE JANGAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
2. SANEERAMMA D/O LATE JANGAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
3. NAGABHUSHAN REDDY S/O LATE JANGAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
4. PRAMEELA D/O LATE JANGAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: High Court of Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010194782025 NC: 2026:KHC:47682 RSA No. 458 of 2025
5. SOMASHEKARA S/O LATE JANGAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 5 ARE PRESENTLY R/AT B.K HALLI VILLAGE, NAGALAMADIKE HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK - 572 136. 6. RATHNAMMA W/O GOVINDA REDDY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
7. NANDINI D/O GOVINDA REDDY AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
8. KUMARI MAMATHA D/O GOVINDA REDDY AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS RESPONDENT NO.6 TO 8 ARE R/AT AMADALAGONDI VILLAGE, MADAKASIRA TALUK, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT, ANDRA PRADESH - 515 301. 9. NARASIMHA S/O KAMANNA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
10. RAJU K S/O KAMANNA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS KAMANNA SINCE DEAD BY LR'S
- 3 -
HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010194782025 NC: 2026:KHC:47682 RSA No. 458 of 2025
11. NALLAKKA W/O LATE KAMANNA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
12. NARASIMHA S/O LATE KAMANNA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
13. RAJU S/O LATE KAMANNA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
14. ANITHA D/O LATE KAMANNA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
15. SATHYANARAYAN REDDY S/O VENKATA REDDY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
16. VENKATA REDDY S/O RAMALINGA REDDY AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS RESPONDENT NO.9 TO 16 ARE R/AT B.K HALLI, NAGALAMADIKE HOBLI PAVAGADA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 136.
…RESPONDENTS (VIDE ORDER DATED 16.07.2026, NOTICE TO R1 TO R5, R9 TO R14 AND R16 ARE HELD SUFFICIENT;
VIDE ORDER DATED 16.07.2026 R6 TO R8 AND R15 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.01.2024 PASSED IN RA NO.5025/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMAKURU SITTING AT MADHUGIRI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.07.2022 PASSED IN OS.NO.3/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, PAVAGADA. - 4 -
HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010194782025 NC: 2026:KHC:47682 RSA No. 458 of 2025
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard on I.A.No.1/2025.
2. Same is filed for condonation of delay of 306 days in filing the appeal. In the affidavit, in support of the application, reasons assigned for the delay is in paragraph No.4.
3. For ready reference, said paragraph No.4 is extracted hereunder:
“4. I further submit that the appellant is old aged lady suffering from sugar, BP and Othraities and other old aged alienates. Being the senior citizen and appellants are illiterate villagers and they have no worldly knowledge of litigations even I am suffering from the old age alienates and because of the above said reasons we could not meet and hand over the documents and papers of the trial court to the present counsel in the Bangalore in time to file the above appeal. The delay caused to the file the above is appeal is due to the said bonafide reasons and not on wonton.”
- 5 -
HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010194782025 NC: 2026:KHC:47682 RSA No. 458 of 2025
4. Since the aforesaid contents were vague in nature, as per the request of learned counsel for appellant, an opportunity was provided to file the better affidavit by this Court.
5. In the better affidavit also, no reasons whatsoever is forthcoming explaining the delay.
6. Contents of the better affidavit in paragraph Nos.3 and 4 reads as under:
“3. I submit that I am the appellant in O.S. No.3/2019 before the Trial Court. The present appeal is filed aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree dated 01.07.2022 passed in O S. No.3/2019 on the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC at Pavagada, confirmed by the Lower Appellate Court vide order dated 20.01.2024 on the file of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge Tumakuru sitting at Madhugiri and the trial court was pleased to decreed the suit of the Plaintiff on 01.07.2022, against which I have preferred the Regular Appeal before IV Additional District and Sessions Judge Tumakuru sitting at Madhugiri in R.A. No.5025/2022 and the lower appellate court also dismissed my Regular Appeal by confirming the trail court
judgment and decree.
4. I further submit that on the strength of the Judgement and decree passed by the trial court and first appellant
- 6 -
HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010194782025 NC: 2026:KHC:47682 RSA No. 458 of 2025 court the respondents are trying to further alienate the suit schedule item No.1 and 2 of the properties to third parties. Hence, the impugned judgment and decree passed by the trial court is liable to be set aside and the matter may kindly be remanded to court below for fresh disposal.”
7. Since the alleged ill health of the appellant is not substantiated by placing any material on record even after affording an opportunity for filing the better affidavit and no reasons whatsoever is forthcoming in the better affidavit so as to condone the huge delay of 306 days.
8. Further, the grievance of the appellant is that pursuant to the decree passed, no Final Decree Proceedings are initiated. Therefore, the defendants are trying to alienate the suit property.
9. If it is so, plaintiff/appellant is at liberty to inform the Trial Court to initiate Final Decree Proceedings and proceed with the Final Decree Proceedings in accordance with law.
- 7 -
HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010194782025 NC: 2026:KHC:47682 RSA No. 458 of 2025
10. With that observation, this Court does not find any good grounds to condone the huge delay of 306 days in filing the appeal.
11. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER i. I.A.No.1/2025 is dismissed. ii. Consequently, appeal is also dismissed. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 57