Karnataka High Court
H Sanjeevappa vs B Lokesh on 30 January, 2025
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K.Somashekar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:4416-DB
RFA No. 1280 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1280 OF 2018 (DEC/INJ)
BETWEEN:
H SANJEEVAPPA
SINCE DEAD.,
REP. BY HIS LRs
1(a) H S SRIDHARA
S/O LATE H SANJEEVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/AT NO.866, NEW NO.14
13TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS
Digitally signed NEAR MARUTHI CIRCLE
by SUMATHY HANUMANTHA NAGARA
KANNAN
BENGALURU-560019.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF ...APPELLANT
KARNATAKA (BY SRI. AMBAJI RAO NAJRE - ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. B LOKESH
S/O LATE BEMANNA
AGEDA BOUT 45YEARS
R/ATNO.119, MARUTHI NAGARA
MAHADESHWARA, NAGARA MAIN ROAD
HEROHALLI CROSS, VISHWANEEDAM POST
BENGLURU-560091.
ALSO AT:SITE NO.32
FORMED IN SY.NO.162/2
VENKATESHWRA LAYOUT
OPP:SYNDICATE BANK COLONY
HEROHALLI, YESHWANTHPUR
BENGALURU-560091.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:4416-DB
RFA No. 1280 of 2018
2. P ASHOK KUMAR
S/O R.PARASMAL,
R/AT NO.29/1, 7TH MAIN ROAD
PAEDARAYANA PURA
BENGALURU-560086
ALSO AT:SITE NO.32
FORMED IN SY.NO.162/2
VENKATESHWRA LAYOUT
OPP:SYNDICATE BANK COLONY
HEROHALLI, YESHWANTHPUR
BENGALURU-560091.
3. B S NAVEEN
S/O SHANTHAKUMAR
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/AT 185 C, SRIHARI KRUKPA
GIRINAGARA 1ST STAGE
3RD CROSS, BENGALURU-560050
ALSO AT:SITE NO.32
FORMED IN SY.NO.162/2
VENKATESHWRA LAYOUT
OPP:SYNDICATE BANK COLONY
HEROHALLI, YESHWANTHPUR
BENGALURU-560091.
4. B PARVATHI
W/O CHINNEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT HOUSE NO.21
AVALAHALLI MAIN ROAD
MUNESHWARA BLOCK
BANASHANKARI 3RD STAGE
BENGLAURU-560026.
ALSO AT:SITE NO.32
FORMED IN SY.NO.162/2
VENKATESHWRA LAYOUT
OPP:SYNDICATE BANK COLONY
HEROHALLI, YESHWANTHPUR
BENGALURU-560091.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:4416-DB
RFA No. 1280 of 2018
5. H S BHAGYA LAKSHMI
W/O R SURESH BABU
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT NO.27, HUCCHAPPA LAYOUT
5TH A CROSS, SHANTHIVARI
GOPALA NAGARA
MUDALAPALYA, BENGALURU-560040.
6. H S ROOPA KUMAR
D/O H SANJEEVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/AT NO.27, 6TH A CROSS
HUCHAPPA LAYOUT
SHANTHIVARI GOPAL NAGAR
MUDALAPALYA, BENGALURU-56700401
(VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 30.01.2025
RESPONDENTS NO.5 & 6 ARE TREATED AS
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF APPELLANT)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P M SIDDAMALLAPPA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT
NO.1(ABSENT); RESPONDENTS NO.5 & 6 ARE SERVED AND
UNREPRESENTED)
THIS RFA FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.11.2017 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.1939/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE II-ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU(RURAL) DISTRICT,
BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION.
THIS RFA, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
AND
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:4416-DB
RFA No. 1280 of 2018
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR)
This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree
rendered by the Trial Court in O.S.No.1939/2015 dated
07.11.2017.
2. Learned counsel Shri Ambaji Rao Najre for appellant
who is present before Court physically, submits that
I.A.No.1/2018 is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act
seeking condonation of delay of 17 days in filing the appeal.
The application is appended with an affidavit of the appellant
assigning reasons. The reasons stated in the affidavit in
support of the application are found to be justifiable and
acceptable. Hence, I.A.No.1/2018 is allowed and the delay of
17 days in filing is condoned.
3. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant H.
Sanjeevappa has died during the pendency of the appeal as on
12.11.2021. This submission of the learned counsel for the
appellant is placed on record. An application I.A.No.1/2024 is
filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation
of delay of 1016 days in filing the LR application to bring the
legal representatives of deceased Sanjeevappa on record. The
NC: 2025:KHC:4416-DB
aforesaid application is appended with an affidavit in detail.
Therefore, the reasons assigned being found to be justifiable
and acceptable, I.A.No.1/2024 is allowed and the delay of 1016
days in filing the appeal is condoned.
4. The application I.A.No.2/2024 is filed under Order 22
Rule 9 CPC seeking to set aside the abatement. This
application is also appended with an affidavit. In view of the
reasons assigned in the application being found to be justifiable
and acceptable, I.A.No.2/2024 is allowed and the abatement is
set aside. I.A.No.3/2024 is filed under Order 22 Rule 3 CPC
seeking to bring the legal representative of the deceased
appellant namely Shri H.S. Sridhara on record as Appellant
No.1(a). This application is also appended with an affidavit
which is found to be justifiable and acceptable. Accordingly,
I.A.No.3/2024 is allowed and consequently, learned counsel for
the appellant is directed to bring the legal representatives of
deceased appellant on record. Learned counsel for the
appellant shall carry out the amendment to the cause-title in
the course of the day and shall also file an amended cause-title.
5. Further, learned counsel for the appellant has filed a
memo for withdrawal of this appeal. In this memo, it reveals
NC: 2025:KHC:4416-DB
that in view of the death of the original plaintiff / appellant
herein, the legal heirs of the appellant have decided to
withdraw the appeal. It is further prayed that in view of the
withdrawal of the appeal, the entire Court fee paid may be
refunded to the appellant. Therefore, learned counsel for the
appellant forcefully submits that the memo of withdrawal be
taken on record and he may be permitted to withdraw this
appeal.
6. In the meanwhile of consideration of the memo for
withdrawal filed by the learned counsel, learned counsel further
submits that Respondent Nos.5 and 6 are also the legal
representatives of the deceased appellant H. Sanjeevappa and
they shall also be treated as legal representatives of appellant
in this appeal. This submission of the learned counsel is taken
on record and respondent Nos.5 and 6 are also treated as the
legal representatives of the deceased appellant.
7. Keeping in view the submission of the learned counsel
for the appellant, the memo for withdrawal is taken on record
and consequently, the legal representatives of the appellant
who have come on record, are permitted to withdraw this
NC: 2025:KHC:4416-DB
appeal as sought for. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as
withdrawn.
8. In view of dismissal of the appeal, the application
I.A.No.1/2021 is disposed of as a consequence.
9. The Registry is directed to refund the entire Court Fee
paid in this appeal in favour of Shri H.S. Sridhara / Appellant
No.1(a) in accordance with the prevailing guidelines, however
on intimation to Respondent Nos.5 and 6 who are also the legal
representatives of the deceased appellant.
SD/-
(K.SOMASHEKAR)
JUDGE
SD/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
KS
