Karnataka High Court
Sri Eranna vs Sri Thimmanna on 22 July, 2025
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:27544
RSA No. 975 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JULY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 975 OF 2023 (PAR/POS-)
BETWEEN:
SRI ERANNA
S/O THIMMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT S R PALYA,
NIDGAL HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK - 561202
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. VEENA T N, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI RAJENDRA K R, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed AND:
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH SRI THIMMANNA
COURT OF
KARNATAKA S/O LATE DASAJJA
@ DASABHOVI,
DEAD, REP. BY LRS.
1(A) AKKAMMA,
W/O LATE THIMMANNA,
W/O SUBBANNA,
AGED 61 YEARS,
R/O VEERAPURA,
AMARAPURA MANDALAM,
MADAKASIRA TALUK,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:27544
RSA No. 975 of 2023
HC-KAR
ANANTHAPURA DIST.
A P STATE-515301.
1(B) SRI HANUMANTHARAYA,
S/O LATE THIMMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
1(C) SRI VASANTHAKUMR,
S/O LATE THIMMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
1(D) SMT. GIRIJAMMA,
D/O LATE THIMMANNA,
W/O VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/O CHIKKATHIRUPI,
GUNDIBANDE MANDALAM,
MADAKASIRA TALUK,
ANANTHAPURA DIST
A P STATE - 515301.
1(E) SHARADAMMA,
D/O LATE THIMMANNA,
W/O HANUMANTHARAYAPPA,
AGED 53 YEARS,
1(F) SRINIVASA,
S/O LATE THIMMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
1(G) SMT. RENUKAMMA,
D/O LATE THIMMANNA,
W/O SHANTHAKUMAR,
AGED 49 YEARS,
R/O HANUMANTHANAHALLY,
Y N HOSAKOTE HOBLI,
PAVAGADA TALUK - 561202.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:27544
RSA No. 975 of 2023
HC-KAR
1(H) SMT. BHARATHI T,
D/O LATE THIMMANNA,
AGED 47 YEARS,
R/O HANUMANTHANAHALLY,
Y N HOSAKOTE HOBLI,
PAVAGADA TALUK - 561202.
SRI SANJEEVAPPA,
S/O LATE DASAJJA @ DASABHOVI,
DEAD BY LRS,
2(A) THIMMAKKA
W/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA,
2(B) JAYAMMA
D/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA,
W/O THIMMANNA,
AGED 55 YEARS,
2(C) RATHNAMMA
W/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA
DEAD BY LRS
2(C)(A) HANUMANTHARAYA,
S/O LATE RATHNAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
2(C)(B) ANJANKUMAR,
S/O LATE RATHNAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
2(C)(C) CHANDRASHEKAR,
S/O LATE RATHNAMMA,
2(C)(D) LAXMAMMA,
D/O LATE RATHNAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:27544
RSA No. 975 of 2023
HC-KAR
2(A) TO 2(C)(D) ARE
R/O CHINNAMMANAHALLI,
BOVI COLONY, K T HALLI POST
GUJJUNADU
PAVAGADA TALUK- 572116
3(A) RAMANJI
S/O LATE DASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
3(B) SMT. KAMALAMMA
D/O LATE DASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
3(A) AND 3(B) ARE
R/O S R PALAYA VILLAGE
NIDGAL HOBLI
PAVAGADA TALUK - 572 116
4 SRI HANUMANTHAPPA
S/O LATE DASAJJA @ DASABHOVI
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
RETIRED GOVT. EMPLOYEE
R/O 4TH CROSS
SHIVAMUKAMBIKANAGARA
UPARAHALLI
TUMKUR - 572136
5 THYAGARAJA P,
S/O PATHRAPPA,
S/O LATE THIMMABHOVI
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
6 HANUMANTHAPPA,
S/O HANUMANTHAPPA,
S/O LATE DASAJJA @ DASABHOVI
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:27544
RSA No. 975 of 2023
HC-KAR
7 DASAPPA
S/O HANUMANTHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
8 JAYAMMA,
FIRST W/O SOMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
9 ALAVELAMMA,
2ND WIFE OF SOMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
10 RAMANNA
S/O PAPAJJI,
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,
RESPONDENTS 1(B), 1(C), 1(E), 1(F), 5 TO 10
ARE R/O S R PALYA VILLAGE,
NIDGAL HOBLI, PAVAGADA TALUK - 572116
11 THE PRESIDENT
NIDGAL SAMSTHANA SIKSHANA COMMITTEE
S R PALAYA, NIDGAL HOBLI
PAVAGADA TALUK - 572 116
...RESPONDENTS
(NOTICE TO R1(A TO H), R2(A&B), R2(C)(C),
R3 (A&B), R6 & R10 IS D/W V/O DT.01.07.2025;
NOTICE TO R2(C)(A, B AND D)
SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 13.03.2023
PASSED IN R.A.NO.64/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT PAVAGADA AND ETC.
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:27544
RSA No. 975 of 2023
HC-KAR
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and
decree dated 13.03.2023 passed in R.A.No.64/2018 on the
file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Pavagada.
2. This matter is listed for admission. In the
previous occasion, this Court heard the matter since there
was a delay of 5 years 3 months 4 days in filing
R.A.No.64/2018 and the counsel for the appellants sought
time to place on records the documents and hence, the
matter was adjourned. Now, the counsel for the appellant
filed I.A.No.1/2025 under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC and
relied upon the medical records of the wife of the
appellant. On perusal of the medical record, it discloses
that the date of admission of the wife of the appellant is
22.07.2015 and date of discharge is 08.08.2015. On going
NC: 2025:KHC:27544
HC-KAR
through the records, it appears that the Original Suit in
O.S.No.37/2012 was dismissed on 24.06.2013 and regular
appeal in R.A.No.64/2018 was filed in the year 2018 and
document placed on record is also pertains to the wife of
the appellant. While filing the appeal, it is not stated that
what prevented the appellant from filing the appeal from
2013 to 2018, even though the documents which was
produced by the appellant in respect of his wife is of the
year 2015 showing that she was suffering from ill-health
but there is no proper explanation for filing the appeal
belatedly. The document which is placed before this Court
also will not comes to the aid of the appellant since the
delay is 5 years 3 months 4 days and each day delay has
not been explained satisfactorily by the appellant. Hence, I
do not find any ground to consider the document which is
placed on record since the same is not relevant document
to condone the delay. The First Appellate Court also while
rejecting the application, comes to the conclusion that to
condone the delay of 5 years 3 months 4 days, nothing is
NC: 2025:KHC:27544
HC-KAR
placed on record except seeking for condonation of delay
and no sufficient cause is shown to condone the delay of 5
years 3 months 4 days. When such being the case, no
ground is made out to admit this appeal and frame the
substantive questions of law.
3. In view of the discussions made above, I pass
the following:
ORDER
The second appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
(H.P.SANDESH)
JUDGE
SN
