Karnataka High Court
Manjappa vs Smt. Sarvamangalamma on 24 August, 2023
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:30420
RSA No. 301 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 301 OF 2023 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
1. MANJAPPA
S/O. KALLAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,
R/AT KOLAHAL VILLAGE,
BHARAMASAGARA HOBLI,
CHITRADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 519.
2. SMT. LATHA
W/O. GOWDARA MALLAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/AT KYATHANAHALLI VILLAGE,
MAYAKONDA HOBLI,
DAVANAGERE TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 002.
Digitally signed
by SHARANYA T 3. SANGAPPA
Location: HIGH S/O. KALLAPPA,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/AT KOLAHAL VILLAGE,
CHITRADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 519.
4. SMT. NAGAVENI
W/O. PRASANNA,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT BASAVANASHIVANAKERE VILLAGE,
BHARAMASAGARA HOBLI,
CHITRADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 501.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:30420
RSA No. 301 of 2023
5. SMT. JYOTHI
W/O. GOWDARA CHANNABASAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/O. CHITRALLI VILLAGE,
HOLALKERE TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 526.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI RAJASHEKAR S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SARVAMANGALAMMA
W/O. LATE SANGANABASAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,
R/AT KOLHAL VILLAGE,
BHARAMASAGARA HOBLI,
CHITRADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 519.
2. SMT. MANJULAMMA
W/O. GOWDARA ESHWARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,
R/AT KYATHANAHALLI VILLAGE,
MAYAKONDA HOBLI,
DAVANAGERE TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 534.
3. SMT. VISHALAMMA
D/O. SANGANABASAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,
R/AT KOLHAL VILLAGE,
BHARAMASAGARA HOBLI,
CHITRADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 519.
4. SMT. KENCHAMAMA @ KAMALAMMA
W/O. SHEKARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:30420
RSA No. 301 of 2023
R/AT RAMAGONDANAHALLY VILLAGE,
MAYAKONDA HOBLI,
DAVANAGERE TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 534.
5. SMT. GANGAMMA
W/O. BASAVARAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,
R/AT CHIGANAKAVANAHALLY VILLAGE,
BILACHODU HOBLI,
JAGALURU TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 528.
6. SMT. PARVATHAMMA
W/O. MANJUNATHA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,
R/AT VASANAHALLY VILLAGE,
HARIHARA TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 516.
7. SMT. NARAMMA
W/O. MARULASIDDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,
R/AT BHARAMASAGARA VILLAGE,
CHITRADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 519.
8. SMT. NARAMMA
W/O. BIDARAKERE JAYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT KOLHAL VILLAGE,
BHARAMASAGARA HOBLI,
CHITRADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRIC-577 519.
9. NINGAMMA S/O. HALAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT KOLAHAL VILLAGE,
BHARAMASAGARA HOBLI,
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC:30420
RSA No. 301 of 2023
CHITRADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 519.
10. SMT. RATHNAMMA
W/O. ANABERU CHANDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT PALLAGATTE VILLAGE,
JAGALURU TALUK,
DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577 528.
11. SMT. SULOCHANA
W/O. ANABERU SIDDAPPA
R/AT PALLAGATTE VILLAGE,
JAGALURU TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 528.
12. GURUSIDDAPPA S/O. HALAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT KOLAHAL VILLAGE,
BHARAMASAGARA HOBLI,
CHITRADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 519.
13. SMT. SAKAMMA W/O. GURUSIDDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/AT KENCHAMMANAHALLY,
JAGALURU TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 528.
14. SMT. PUSHPA
W/O. SIDDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/AT NALLIKATTE VILLAGE,
BHARAMASAGARA HOBLI,
CHITRADURGA TALUK-577 557.
15. K.G. GURUSHANTHAPPA
S/O. GURUSIDDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS,
R/AT KOLHAL VILLAGE,
BHARAMASAGARA HOBLI,
CHITRADURGA TALUK,
-5-
NC: 2023:KHC:30420
RSA No. 301 of 2023
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 519.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.11.2022
PASSED IN R.A.NO.7/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA, DISMISSING
THE APPEAL AND UPHELDING THE ORDER DATED 04.03.2021
PASSED IN FDP NO.4/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE C/c. I
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHITRADURGA,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 18
RULE 20 OF CPC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This matter is listed for admission and I have heard the
learned counsel for the appellants.
2. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and
decree dated 23.11.2022 passed in R.A.No.7/2022 on the file of
the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga,
dismissing the appeal and uphelding the order dated
04.03.2021 passed in FDP No.4/2019 on the file of the C/c. I
Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Chitradurga, partly
allowing the petition filed under Order 18, Rule 20 of CPC.
3. The dispute between the appellants and the
respondents is with regard to Block Nos.3, 4 and 5 which is
NC: 2023:KHC:30420
RSA No. 301 of 2023
mentioned in schedule 'B' and 'C'. Admittedly, the appellants
have not filed any objection to the Commissioner report before
the FDP Court before drawing the final decree. When the
same is not objected before the FDP Court, now, the learned
counsel for the appellants cannot contend that the allotment of
share is not correct. If the appellants are having any grievance,
they ought to have raised the same before the FDP Court itself
and when no objection is filed before the FDP Court and
accepted the Commissioner report, now the appellants again
cannot raise the same before this Court in a second appeal.
Hence, I do not find any error in the order passed by the First
Appellate Court and the FDP Court since, the very appellants
have not filed any objection for the Commissioner report in the
FDP Court, before drawing the final decree. Therefore, I do not
find any ground to admit the appeal and frame substantial
question of law invoking Section 100 of CPC.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
ST
