Karnataka High Court
Smt. Sujata W/O. Basalingappa ... vs Shridevi W/O. Chandragouda ... on 7 June, 2024
Author: M.G.S. Kamal
Bench: M.G.S. Kamal
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7592
CRP No. 100142 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 100142 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SUJATA W/O. BASALINGAPPA GOVANKOPPA
AGE: 74 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. "KAMAL KUNJ", 2ND CROSS,
OPP. SHRUSHTHI COLLEGE,
NARAYANPUR, DHARWAD-580008.
2. SMT. INDIRA W/O. FAKKIRAPPA PATIL
AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. NEAR KARIYAMMA TEMPLE,
SHANTI NIKETAN NAGAR,
KELAGERI,SHANTI NIKETAN NAGAR,
KELAGERI, DHARWAD-580008.
3. SMT. MADHUMATI W/O. LOKANATH GOUDAR
AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. #PLOT NO.6, MALAVATTI,
SIDDAPUR, AVARGUPPA,
UTTARA KANNADA-581355.
Digitally signed
by YASHAVANT
4. SMT. JAYASHREE W/O. CHANDRASHEKHAR B.E.
NARAYANKAR AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
R/O. PLOT NO.6, ANUSHA RESIDENCY,
DODDANAYAKANAKOPPA,
KELAGERI, DHARWAD-580008.
5. SHRI. LINGARAJ S/O. DANSHEKHARGOUDA PATIL
AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: MEDICAL PRACTITIONER,
R/O. SULLA VILLAGE, TQ. HUBBALLI,
DIST. DHARWAD-580023.
6. SMT. MANORAMA W/O. YALLANAGOUDA PATIL
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. BANASHREE NAGAR,
DODDANAYAKANAKOPPA, DHARWAD-580008.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7592
CRP No. 100142 of 2023
7. SHRI. VEERENDRA S/O. DANSHEKHARGOUDA PATIL
AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. NABI PLOTS, SULLA ROAD,
KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI-580023.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT.NIRMALA B.G., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRIDEVI W/O. CHANDRAGOUDA RAYANGOUDAR,
AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. CHIKKAULLIGERI, TQ. SAUNDATTI,
DIST. BELAGAVI-591126.
2. GANGADHAR S/O. SHIVANAND SANGOLLI
CLAIMING HIMSELF AS
GANGADHAR S/O. ISHWARAPPA HOSAMANI,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. SULLA VILLAGE, TQ: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580023.
3. CHIDANAND S/O. SHIVANNAD SANGOLLI
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. HIREULLIGERI, TQ: SAVADATI,
DIST: BELAGAVI-591126.
4. NEELAGANGAMMA W/O.
DEVENDRAPPA POOJAR @ HOSAMANI,
AGE: 73 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. SULLA VILLAGE, TQ: HUBBALLI ,
DIST: DHARWAD-580023.
5. GURUBAI W/O. GURUSIDDAPPA ANGADI
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. SIDDARAMESHWAR NAGAR,
OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI-580031.
6. VANAMALA W/O. SHIVANAND MAREWAD,
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. GOUDAR ONI, SAIDAPUR,
DHARWAD-580001.
7. MANJULA W/O. ISHWARAPPA HITTALAMANI
AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: NICHINKKI VILLAGE, KITTUR,
TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI-591115.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7592
CRP No. 100142 of 2023
8. SHIVAYOGI
S/O. DEVENDRAPPA POOJAR @ HOSAMANI,
AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. SAIDAPUR, DHARWAD,
DIST: DHARWAD-580001.
9. SHUDHIR @ SUDHAKAR
S/O. DEVENDRAPPA POOJAR @ HOSAMANI,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. SULLA VILLAGE, TQ: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580023.
10. SHALINI W/O. PRAKASH BADIGER
AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. GOLALKOPPA TQ., DIST: DHARWAD-580001.
11. ASHOK S/O. DYAMAPPA @ POOJAR HOSAMANI,
AGE: 73 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. SULLA VILLAGE, TQ: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580023.
12. SHANKARAPPA S/O. DYAMAPPA @ POOJAR HOSAMANI,
AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. SULLA VILLAGE, TQ: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580023.
13. RAJASHEKHARAPPA
S/O. DYAMAPPA @ POOJAR HOSAMANI,
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. SULLA VILLAGE, TQ: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580023.
14. SURESH S/O. SANGANABASAPPA ONTI
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. SULLA VILLAGE, TQ: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580023.
15. DODDAYALLAPPA S/O. SHANKARAPPA NARTHI
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. SULLA VILLAGE, TQ: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DHARWAD-580023.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.MANJUNATH A.KARIGANNAVAR,
ADV. FOR R4, R6, R8 TO R13;
SRI.ABHISHEK L.KALLED, ADVOCATE FOR R14;
NOTICE TO R1 TO R3, R5 AND R7 ARE SERVED;
NOTICE TO R15 IS REFUSED)
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7592
CRP No. 100142 of 2023
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.115 OF
CPC, PRAYING TO, CALL FOR THE RECORDS; SET-ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT DATED 01.08.2023 MISC.NO.17/2021, ON THE FILE OF
THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
JUDGE, HUBBALLI, (ANNEXURE-C) AND CONSEQUENTLY, RESTORE
THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN O.S.NO.311/2015 ON THE FILE OF LD.
II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBBALLI
(ANNEXURE-B) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. This petition is by the plaintiffs aggrieved by the
order dated 01.08.2023 passed in Misc.No.17/2021 on the
file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi,
by which the application filed under Order IX Rule 4, read
with Section 151 of CPC by the plaintiffs seeking restoration
of suit in O.S.No.311/2015, which was dismissed for non-
prosecution by order dated 02.12.2019, came to be
dismissed.
2. The above suit in O.S.No.311/2015 is filed by the
plaintiffs for relief of partition and separate possession.
Issues were framed and the matter was set down for
evidence of the plaintiffs on 02.12.2019. It appears plaintiffs
had sought for time to lead additional evidence on earlier
occasion and the time was granted by imposing cost. It
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7592
appears on the date when the matter was set down for
evidence, i.e., 02.12.2019 a request for adjournment of the
matter was sought by the counsel for the plaintiffs, which
was opposed by the counsel for the defendants. The trial
Court, taking note of the earlier adjournment, as sought by
the plaintiffs despite imposing the cost, declined to grant
adjournment, accordingly dismissed the suit for non-
prosecution. Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiffs filed a
miscellaneous petition in Misc.No.17/2021 under Order IX
Rule 4 read with Section 151 of CPC. The reason assigned by
the plaintiffs for not leading evidence was that plaintiffs'
witness was suffering from acute leukemia. As such, she was
not able to contact her counsel and know the status of the
case. This reason has not convinced the trial Court sufficient
enough to condone non-presence of the witnesses to lead
evidence. Accordingly, the trial Court dismissed the
application.
3. Petition is vehemently opposed by the learned
counsel for the respondents.
4. Heard and perused the records.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7592
5. Suit is one for partition and separate possession.
Though the plaintiffs were afforded sufficient opportunity,
evidence was not lead. However, the reason assigned is that,
the plaintiffs' witness was suffering from acute leukemia.
Miscellaneous Petition was dismissed declining to accept the
same as a ground.
6. Necessary to note that though the suit is
dismissed for non-prosecution, it does not prevent the
plaintiffs from filing a fresh suit. However, to avoid any
unnecessary further delay in filing the suit, they may be
permitted to prosecute the same suit.
7. In that view of the matter, considering the facts
and circumstances of the matter and the reason assigned,
this Court is of the considered view that the petition
deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed.
8. The order dated 01.08.2023 in Misc.No.17/2021,
on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC,
Hubballi is set aside and the order dated 02.12.2019 in
O.S.No.311/2015 is recalled and the suit is restored to its
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7592
original file, subject to plaintiffs paying cost of Rs.10,000/- to
the respondents before the trial Court.
9. It is made clear that the plaintiffs shall not seek
unnecessary adjournment in the matter and cooperate in
expeditious disposal of the suit.
10. The trial Court shall endeavour to dispose of the
matter as expeditiously as possible.
SD/-
JUDGE
KGK
