- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4019 RSA No. 1112 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1112 OF 2023 (PAR) BETWEEN: SRI SHIVARAMU S/O LATE. DODDAHANUMANTHAPPA, AGED AGBOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT, GUNDLAGURKI VILLAGE, KASBA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562 101 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. LOURDU MARIYAPPA A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT CHANNAMMA W/O LATE. NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 2. SMT. DYAVAMMA S/O LATE. NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, 3. SRI. NAGARAJU S/O LATE. DODDAHANUMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3 ARE R/ AT, GUNDLAGURKI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-562101 4. SRI. VENKATARAJU S/O LATE. DODDAHANUMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4019 RSA No. 1112 of 2023 RESIDING AT, CHIKKAMARULI VILLAGE, NANDI HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT- 562101 5. SMT. RATHNAMMA S/O LATE. CHIKKAHANUMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 6. SRI.VENKATESH S/O LATE.CHIKKA HANUMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, 7. SRI.MANJUNATHA S/O LATE. CHIKKAHNUMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, RESPONDENT NOS.5 TO 7 ARE RESIDING AT, KANDAVARA, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT- 562101 8. SMT.NARASAMMA S/O LATE JAYARAM AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 9. SRI.BYRAPPA S/O LATE JAYARAM AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 10. SRI.SRINIVAS S/O LATE JAYARAM AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS RESPONDENT NO.8 TO 10 ARE R/AT, 4040 1ST BLOCK WARD NO.2 VAPASANDRA CHIKKABALLAPURA TOWN - 562 101 11. SRI. SHIVANNA S/O LATE. CHIKKA HANUMANTHAPPA, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4019 RSA No. 1112 of 2023 AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT, BANNIKUPPE VILLAGE, NANDI HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPRA, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562101 12. SRI. RAVIKUMAR S/O LATE. CHIKKA HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT, GUNDLAGURKI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK-562101 13. SMT. RATHNAMMA W/O LATE. BYRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT, DIBBUR VILLAGE AND POST, KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK, CHIKKBALLAPUR DISTRICT-562101. 14. SRI. NARAYANASWAMY S/O CHIKKA HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEAS, R/AT, BEHIND T.B. CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-5621010. 15. G.M. RAMAKRISHNAPPA S/O PETE MUNISHAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R.AT, GUNDALGURKI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-562101. 16. V.ANANDAMURTHY S/O VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT, ANDHARLAHALLI VILLAGE, NANDI HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK CHIKKBALLAPURA DISTRICT-562101. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4019 RSA No. 1112 of 2023 17. SMT. MUNILAKSHMAMMA W/O NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, GAUNDLAGURKI VILLAGE, NANDI HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562101. …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.11.2020 PASSED IN RA.NO.87/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AND JMFC, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 02.03.2019 PASSED IN O.S.NO.284/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE, AND JMFC, CHIKKABALLAPURA. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL JUDGMENT I.A.no.1/2023 is filed for condonation of 390 days in filing appeal. 2. Learned counsel for appellant submitted that delay was caused on account of ill-health, as appellant is suffering from Asthama and other old age ailments, and therefore, submits that there was sufficient cause for delay and seeks for its condonation. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4019 RSA No. 1112 of 2023 3. Heard learned counsel and perused application and affidavit filed in support of it. 4. As stated above, there is enormous delay of 390 days in filing this appeal. Only explanation or semblance thereof is in para 3 of affidavit, which reads as follows - "3. I advised to submit that, the above appeal should be file within ninety days from the date of Hon'ble lower appellate court judgment. But today I am filing appeal and there is delay of 390 days. The reasons for the delay in filing the above appeal, due to my illness. My counsel herein has advised me to come over to Bengaluru in the first week of this Month. However due to my illness I am suffering from Aasthma and other old age ailments, I am unable to met my counsel in Bengaluru in the first week of this month and consequently failed file this second appeal within time. The accompanying application, has been filed condone the delay of twelve days in filing above Appeal. Hence there is a delay in filing the appeal and the reason for delay is bonfaide one and not intentional one, as mentioned supra. Under these circumstances it is just and proper to allow the accompanying application. If the accompanying application is allowed no hardship or injury would be caused to the respondent herein, per contra if the accompanying application - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4019 RSA No. 1112 of 2023 is not allowed I will be put to great hardship and injury. Hence this Affidavit." 5. Perusal of above paragraph would reveal that appellant was well aware of period of limitation. It is also stated that appellant was advised by his counsel to come over to Bangalore in first week to file appeal, but appellant could not come over and instruct counsel. It was presumed that delay is of 12 days. Consequently, explanation offered in affidavit was for 12 days, instead of 390 days, asthama and other old age ailments have prevented appellant from filing appeal in time. Same is not substantiated with medical records. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Thirunagalingam v. Lingeswaran & Another reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 1093 has stated that in case of lack of proper explanation, Courts would not be justified in condoning delay. Hence, due to failure to offer reasonable explanation for delay, I.A.no.1/2023 is rejected. Consequently, appeal and application for stay also stand dismissed. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11