Karnataka High Court
Lokeshappa vs Ramaswamy on 14 August, 2023
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:28794
RSA No. 1246 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1246/2021 (DEC/INJ)
BETWEEN:
1. LOKESHAPPA,
S/O LATE KARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,
2. SMT. YASHODHAMMA,
W/O SHEKARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
ARECA COOLIE,
3. SMT. LALITHAMMA,
W/O MOHANAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,
4. SMT. JAYAMMA,
W/O RENUKESHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
[ALL ARE R/O KASHIPURA EXTENSION,
Digitally signed
SHIVAMOGGA] - 577 201.
by SHARANYA T ...APPELLANTS
Location: HIGH (BY SRI. M.V.MAHESWARAPPA., ADVOCATE)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AND:
1. RAMASWAMY,
S/O LATE HONNEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
DRIVER KSRTC,
R/O LAKKAPPA LAYOUT,
NEAR KARIMARIYAMMA TEMPLE,
KASHIPURA EXTENSION,
SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201.
2. MANJU,
S/O RAMASWAMY,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:28794
RSA No. 1246 of 2021
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/O KASHIPURA EXTENSION,
SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 04.07.2017
PASSED IN RA.No.84/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, SHIVAMOGGA, DISMISSING
THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 10.03.2014 PASSED IN OS No.288/2013 ON THE FILE
OF THE IV ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
SHIVAMOGGA.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard the appellants' counsel on I.A.No.1/2020
where there is a delay of 1127 days in filing the appeal.
In support of application, an affidavit is sworn to by the
appellant No.1 stating that trial court advocate had not
intimated him regarding the stage of appeal filed by him
and after 3 years the trial court advocate had contacted
him and he intentionally avoided to inform him about the
date of judgment. Then he personally visited the trial
court in the month of June' 2020, but in the meanwhile
due to Covid-19 the trial court was locked down. Later he
NC: 2023:KHC:28794
RSA No. 1246 of 2021
contacted the High Court advocate and obtained the
certified copy and filed an appeal before the Court.
2. Having heard the appellants' counsel and on
perusal of grounds urged in the affidavit, it discloses that
the judgment was passed on 04.07.2017 and the reason
assigned by the appellant No.1 was that the advocate who
was on record before the trial court had not intimated him
about the same. But no explanation is offered as to what
prevented him from contacting the advocate from 2017 to
2020. Nothing is stated in the affidavit and no reasons are
assigned in not contacting the advocate. Apart from that,
he also claims that he contacted the advocate in June'
2020 and obtained the certified copy on 16.06.2020. Even
after obtaining the certified copy also, the appeal was filed
on 03.11.2020.
3. For the reasons stated in the application,
though he makes an allegation against an advocate, he
does not whisper anything about as to why he did not
contact the advocate from 2017 to 2020. The other
NC: 2023:KHC:28794
RSA No. 1246 of 2021
reason assigned by the appellant No.1 is Covid and the
Covid started only in the month of March' 2020. No
explanation is forthcoming as to what prevented him in
filing the appeal from 2017 to 2020. Even after obtaining
the certified copy in the month of June' 2020, almost 5
months the appeal was not filed before the Court and the
same was filed only on 03.11.2020. Hence, I do not find
satisfactory reasons to condone the delay of 1127 days in
filing the appeal. The reasons assigned in the affidavit is
not satisfactory, hence, I.A.No.1/2020 is rejected.
Consequently, appeal is also dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DR
