Sri. Devegowda vs Smt. Vinoda
2023 Latest Caselaw 5901 Kant

                                                 -1-
                                                         NC: 2023:KHC:30045
                                                        RSA No. 690 of 2021




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                           DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

                                           BEFORE

                             THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

                        REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 690 OF 2021 (PAR)

                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    SRI DEVEGOWDA
                         S/O LATE MARIGOWDA
                         AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
                         R/AT MOSALEHOSAHALLI VILLAGE
                         SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI
                         HASSAN TALUK
                         HASSAN-573 212.
                                                           ...APPELLANT

                            (BY SRI ROOPESHA B., ADVOCATE [ABSENT])
                   AND:

                   1.    SMT. VINODA
                         W/O JAYARAM
                         AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
Digitally signed
by SHARANYA T            R/AT MARENAHALLYVILLAGE
Location: HIGH           SHANTHIGARAMA HOBLI
COURT OF                 HASSAN TALUK-573 212.
KARNATAKA

                   2.    KAMALAMMA
                         W/O THIMMEGOWDA
                         AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
                         R/AT MADAPURA VILLAGE
                         HASSAN TALUK
                         HASSAN-573 212.

                   3.    PUTTAMMA
                         W/O NAGANNA
                         AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
                         R/AT BEEKANAHALLY VILLAGE
                            -2-
                                       NC: 2023:KHC:30045
                                   RSA No. 690 of 2021




     HASSAN TALUK
     HASSAN-573 212.

4.   PADMAMMA
     W/O NARAYANAGOWDA
     AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
     R/AT HULUVARE VILLAGEHASSAN TALUK
     HASSAN-573 212.

5.   NANAJAMMA @ PUTTANANJAMMA
     W/O LATE MARIGOWDA
     AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS
     R/AT MASALE HOSALLYHASSAN TALUK
     HASSAN-573 212.

6.   PRAMEELAMMA
     W/O PUTTASWAMY
     AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
     R/AT CHIKKAHONNENAHALLY
     HASSAN TALUK
     HASSAN-573 212.

7.   KAMAKSHAMMA
     W/O DEVEGOWDA
     AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
     R/AT MOSALEHOSALLAY
     HASSAN TALUK
     HASSAN-573 212.
                                          ...RESPONDENTS

      THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.08.2017
PASSED IN R.A.NO.6/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HASSAN, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND
CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 21.11.2011
PASSED IN O.S.NO.45/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HASSAN.

    THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                -3-
                                            NC: 2023:KHC:30045
                                           RSA No. 690 of 2021




                          JUDGMENT

Heard the appellant's counsel on IA No.1/2021, where

there is a delay of 862 days in filing the appeal. The appeal was

also filed by the very same appellant before the Appellate Court

and judgment was delivered on 16.8.2017 and the present

second appeal is filed in the year 2021 and the same is

numbered in 2022.

2. The reason assigned in the application and affidavit

that during the pendency of the appeal with the intervention of

elders and well wishers he has approached the first respondent

and talks were taken place for compromise, as there was talks

for compromise he did not pursue the appeal with a fond hope

that matter may be settled amicably. Only when he contacted

his advocate in the 1st week of August, 2019 he came to know

about dismissal of the appeal. It is also his averment in the

affidavit that he was suffering from Jaundice and did not

recover early.

3. Again he contacted his counsel in the month of March,

2020 and applied for certified copies. The copies are obtained in

the month of June 2020 and the same was intimated to him

NC: 2023:KHC:30045 RSA No. 690 of 2021

through phone. In the meantime, lockdown was imposed by the

State Government with regard to Covid-19 and he could not

take any steps to file the appeal and hence, delay may be

condoned.

4. Having considered the reasons assigned in the

affidavit, it is very clear that he came to know about dismissal

of the appeal in the month of August 2019 itself, and only

reason assigned was that he is suffering from Jaundice and no

material is placed with regard to the said fact and also in the

affidavit it is stated that in the first week of March, 2020 he has

applied for certified copies and the second appeal is filed in the

month of August, 2021 and even in spite of the knowledge of

dismissal of the appeal, steps were not taken immediately and

once again pleaded that due to Covid-19 he could not take

steps. When the appeal was dismissed in 2017 and when the

same came to his knowledge in August, 2019 itself and also he

had obtained certified copies in the month of March, 2020 itself,

did not file the appeal within the time and also there is delay of

862 days excluding the Covid period and the reason assigned in

the application and affidavit is also not satisfactory and hence,

no grounds to condone the delay.

NC: 2023:KHC:30045 RSA No. 690 of 2021

5. Accordingly, IA No.1/2021 is dismissed and

consequently, the appeal is also dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

AP