- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7070 RSA No. 132 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 132 OF 2024 (PAR) BETWEEN: LAKSHMINARAYANA S/O NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/A RAMASWAMIPALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI BAGEPALLI TALUK CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT - 561 207 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. THRIMURTHY K.P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. SUKANYA W/O LAKSHMINARAYANA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS 2. BABY SREELAKHA D/O LAKSHMINARAYANA AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER SMT SUKANYA(R1) BOTH ARE RESIDING AT RAMASWAMYPALLI VILLAGE Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7070 RSA No. 132 of 2024 KASABA HOBLI BAGEPALLI TALUK CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT - 561 207 3. SMT ASWATHAMMA W/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 4. B K ADINARAYANA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 5. B K RAJENDRA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS 6. SMT SUBBALAKSHMAMMA W/O NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS 7. SRINIVASA NAIDU S/O NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 8. SMT PADMA W/O NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS 9. SHIVAPPA NAIDU S/O NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 10. SMT ADILAKSHMAMMA D/O NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7070 RSA No. 132 of 2024 11. RAGHURAM S/O NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 12. SUJATHA D/O NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESPONDENTS 3 T0 12 ARE R/O RAMASWAMIPALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI BAGEPALLI TALUK CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.08.2020 PASSED IN RA NO.09/2019 ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.12.2018 PASSED IN OS NO.195/2010 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, CHIKKABALLAPURA. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7070 RSA No. 132 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT Challenging judgment and decree Dated 07.08.2020 passed by III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura, allowing RA no.09/2019, by setting-aside judgment and decree dated 11.12.2018 passed by Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Chikkaballapura, in OS no.195/2010, this appeal is filed. 2. It is seen there is delay of 603 days in filing appeal and I.A. no.1/2024 is filed for its condonation. 3. Sri KP Thrimurthy, learned counsel for appellant submits that delay was on account of prevalence of Covid-19 pandemic, immediately after passing of judgment by first appellate Court. Thereafter, when appellant intended to file appeal, he had misplaced certified copy of judgment and therefore, fresh certified copy was applied and appeal was filed. Thus, there was sufficient explanation and seeks for allowing application. 4. Heard learned counsel and perused I.A.no.1/2024 and affidavit filed in support thereof. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7070 RSA No. 132 of 2024 5. Impugned judgment was passed by first appellate Court on 07.08.2020 during prevalence of Covid-19 pandemic. However, taking note of same, it is seen that registry has given rebate for 570 days, out of total period of delay of 1174 days. For remaining period of 603 days, only explanation alleged is ill-health and misplacement of certified copy of judgment and decree. Same appears to be vague, casual and failed to inspire confidence of this Court. Hence, for want of proper explanation, I.A.no.1/2024 is rejected. Consequently, appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE LL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30