Karnataka High Court
Channabasappa vs Ningappa Mookappa Karadi Since ... on 22 June, 2023
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
RSA No. 462 of 2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 462 OF 2007 (PAR-)
BETWEEN:
CHANNABASAPPA S/O KARABASAPPA KARADI,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: SUDAMBI -581120, TALUK: BYADGI,
DIST: HAVERI- 581120.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VINAY S. KOUJALAGI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. NINGAPPA MOOKAPPA KARADI
SINCE DECD BY HIS LRS
1A. SMT. SHANTAVVA W/O. NINGAPPA KARADAR
@KARADI, AGE: 51 YEARS,
R/O: SUDAMBI, TALUK: BYADGI,
Digitally
DIST: HAVERI- 581120.
signed by
SAROJA
SAROJA HANGARAKI
HANGARAKI Date: 1B. RAVINDRA S/O. NINGAPPA
2023.06.23
15:30:27 - KARADAR ALIAS KARADI,
0700
AGE: 31 YEARS, R/O: SUDAMBI,
TALUK: BYADGI, DIST: HAVERI- 581120.
1C. ARAVIND S/O. NINGAPPA KARADAR
ALIAS KARADI, AGE: 29 YEARS,
R/O: SUDAMBI, TALUK: BYADGI,
DIST: HAVERI- 581120.
1D. SMT. GEETHA D/O. NINGAPPA KARADAR
ALIAS KARADI, AGE: 26 YEARS,
R/O: SUDAMBI, TALUK: BYADGI,
-2-
RSA No. 462 of 2007
DIST: HAVERI- 581120.
1E. ARUN KUMAR S/O. NINGAPPA KARADAR
ALIAS KARADI, AGE: 23 YEARS,
R/O: SUDAMBI, TALUK: BYADGI,
DIST: HAVERI- 581120.
2. SHIVABASAPPA S/O. MOOKAPPA KARADI,
AGED: 52 YEARS, R/O: SUDAMBI,
TALUK: BYADGI, DIST: HAVERI- 581120.
3. BASAPPA HANUMAPPA KARADI,
AGED 65YEARS, R/O: SUDAMBI,
TALUK: BYADGI, DIST: HAVERI- 581120.
4. SMT. GANGAVVA
W/O. HANUMAGOUDA KANAKER
(GULERI), AGED 69 YEARS,
R/O. SATENAHALLI, TALUK: HIREKARUR,
DIST: HAVERI- 581111.
5. SMT. HANUMAVVA W/O. IRAPPA MOOLIKERI,
AGE: 71 YEARS, R/O: SATENAHALLI,
TALUK: HIREKARUR, DIST: HAVERI- 581111.
6. SMT. KAMALAVVA W/O. MALLAPPA JADAR,
AGE: 76 YEARS, R/O: SUDAMBI,
TALUK: BYADGI, DIST: HAVERI- 581120.
SINCE DECEASED BY LRS.
6A. SMT. SHARADAVVA W/O. MAHADEVAPPA
JOGANDAR,
SINCE DECEASED BY LRS.
6A(i) CHAMAPPA MAHADEVAPPA JOGANDAR,
AGED: 40 YEARS, OCCU: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MADLUR, TALUKA: HIREKERUR,
6A(ii) SMT. JAYAMMA W/O. PRABHU BATLER,
AGED: 38 YEARS,
OCCU: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
-3-
RSA No. 462 of 2007
R/O: SUDAMBI, TALUKA: BYADGI.
6A(iii) IRAPPA MAHADEVAPPA JOGANDAR,
AGED: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MAGLUR, TALUKA: BYADGI.
6A(iv) SMT. SHAILA W/O. UMESHAPPA YALIWAL,
AGED: 34 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: SATENAHALLI, TALUK: HIREKERUR.
6A(v) SMT. NIRMALA W/O. SURESHAPPA
BELAVANTHANAKOPPA, AGED: 32 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: BEERANAKOPPA,
TALUK: BYADGI.
6B. SMT. GIRIJAVVA W/O. NINGAPPA KULARNI,
AGED: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: SUDAMBI, TALUK: BYADGI.
6C. SMT. INDRAVVA W/O. VEERABASANAGOUDA
RAMANAGOUDA, AGED: 55 YEARS,
OCCU: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: TIMMANAHALLI,
TALUK: HIREKERUR.
6D. SMT. SAVAKKA
W/O. CHANDRAPPA JOGANDAR,
AGED: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: MADLUR, TALUK: HIREKERUR.
6E. SMT. VIJAYAKKA
W/O. RUDRAGOUDA KAREKATTI,
AGED: 46 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER,
R/O: RANEBENNUR.
6F. SMT. SHANTAVVA
W/O. MALLANAGOUDA JADAR,
AGED: 44 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: SUDAMBI, TALUK: BYADAGI.
7. SMT. GIRIJAWWA
W/O. KARABASAPPA KARADI,
AGE: 64 YEARS, R/O: SUDAMBI,
-4-
RSA No. 462 of 2007
TALUK: BYADGI, DIST: HAVERI- 581120.
8. SHANMUKAPPA CHANNABASAPPA KARADI,
AGE: 32 YEARS, R/O: SUDAMBI,
TALUK: BYADGI,
DIST: HAVERI- 581120.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. A.S. PATIL, AND
SRI. SABEEL AHMED, ADVOCATE FOR R1(A-E) & R2,
SRI. R.G. HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R6(E),
NOTICE TO R3, R4, R5, R6A(i), R6A(ii), R6A(iii),
R6A(iv), R6A(v), R6B, R6C, R6D, R6F ARE SERVED,
NOTICE TO R7 AND R8 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE
DATED: 16.11.2006 PASSED IN R.A.NO.54/1999 ON THE
FILE OF THE ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.), RANEBENNUR,
ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT
AND DECREE DATED: 24.2.1999 PASSED IN OS.NO. 56/1994
ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) & JMFC, BYADGI.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.Vinay Koujalagi, learned counsel for the
appellant.
2. Sole appellant died on 26.10.2018. The appeal
stands abated in view of the fact that no application is filed
to bring his legal representatives on record.
RSA No. 462 of 2007
3. However, on noticing the material on record, it
is seen that suppressing the original suit filed by appellant
in O.S.No.29/1988, second suit came to be filed by
appellant in O.S.No.56/1994. The suppression is with all
malafide intention. The suit in O.S.No.56/1994 came to be
decreed and against which an appeal came to be filed by
the defendants in RFA No.54/1999. The appeal came to be
allowed setting aside the decree passed in O.S.No.56/1994
by considered judgment dated 16.11.2006. Thereafter, the
second appeal is filed and the same came to be admitted
by this Court on the following substantial question of law:
"Whether the first appellate Court has
committed an error in allowing the parties therein
to adduce additional evidence without there being
any written statement filed in O.S.No.55/1995?"
4. Even in the appeal grounds, there is not even a
whisper with regard to filing of earlier suit in
O.S.No.29/1988. The suppression of earlier suit is thus
deliberate and with a malafide intention and the appellant
RSA No. 462 of 2007
gone on prosecuting the matter resulting in abuse of
process of law.
5. Since the appellant is dead and the appeal
stands abated by operation of law, no further order of
imposing cost, etc., can be passed by this Court in the
absence of legal representatives of the deceased appellant
brought on record. Accordingly, following order is passed:
ORDER
Appeal stands dismissed as abated.
However, if the legal representatives of the
deceased sole appellant file an application seeking setting
aside abatement, the Court while considering such an
application on merits, shall bestow its attention with
regard to the suppression of fact of filing earlier suit in
O.S.No.29/1988 and impose appropriate cost before
allowing the application seeking setting aside abatement.
Sd/-
JUDGE
