Karnataka High Court
Nageshwari vs Jagadevi on 5 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6544
MFA No. 201704 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201704 OF 2025 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. NAGESHWARI
D/O. LATE SHIVRUDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
R/O H.NO.15-2-39, BANK COLONY,
BIDAR-585 401.
2. PARMESHWARI
D/O. LATE SHIVRUDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
R/O H.NO.15-2-39, BANK COLONY,
BIDAR-585 401.
Digitally
signed by 3. SUVARNA
SUMITRA W/O. LATE SHIVRUDRAPPA,
SHERIGAR AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC. GOVT.SERVANT,
Location: R/O H.NO.15-2-39, BANK COLONY,
HIGH BIDAR-585 401.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RAVI B PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JAGADEVI
S/O. LATE PUNDLIKAPPA
(W/O RACHAPPA),
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC.HOUSEHOLD,
R/O NIRNAWADI.
NOW AT GURU KRUPA NEAR HANUMAN TEMPLE,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6544
MFA No. 201704 of 2025
HC-KAR
MAHESH NAGAR, BIDAR-585 401.
2. SREEDEVI
D/O. LATE PUNDLINKAPPA
(W/O BASWARAJ BIRADAR)
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
OCC. PHYSICAL TEACHER IN PVT. SCHOOL,
R/O H.NO.9-12-649/12, SECOND CROSS,
VIDYA NAGAR COLONY, BIDAR-585 401.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PATIL GANGSHETTY, ADV. FOR R1 & R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/O XLIII RULE 1(t) CPC, PRAYING
TO A) CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN CIVIL MISC. NO. 9/2022 ON
THE FILE OF THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
ITINERARY SITTING AT BHALKI. B) SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
ORDER DATED 10.03.2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE ITINERARY SITTING AT
BHALKI IN CIVIL MISC.NO. 9/2022 AND CONSEQUENTIALLY TO
SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF DISMISSAL OF APPEAL FOR
DEFAULT IN R.A.NO. 20/2017 DATED 02.11.2021, THEREBY
RESTORE THE APPEAL IN R.A.NO. 20/2017 BY PERMITTING
THE APPELLANTS TO CONTEST THE APPEAL ON ITS MERITS, IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
JUDGMENT ON 16.10.2025 AND COMING ON FOR
'PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT', THIS DAY, THE COURT
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6544
MFA No. 201704 of 2025
HC-KAR
CAV JUDGMENT
1. Civil Miscellaneous No.9/2022 is filed against the
dismissal order in R.A.No.20/2017 dated 02.11.2021 as it
was dismissed for default.
2. The appellant Nos.1 and 2 are daughters of
appellant No.3 and they are the legal representatives of
Shivarudrappa. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are the daughters of
Pundalikappa and Sisters of Shivarudrappa. Pundalikappa
has two sons and two daughters. Appellant No.3 is the wife
of Shivarudrappa i.e. younger son of Pundalikappa. The
appellants have stated that, they have received
Rs.4,93,636/- from the Government towards service benefits
of Shivarudappa, who was working as Manager in Veterinary
college and died on 04.12.1998 and sought for issuance of
Succession Certificate in respect of the same. Respondent
Nos.1 and 2 admitted their relationship, but stated that, their
father has not received service benefits of Shivarudrappa
and Court decided that all of them are entitle to 1/3rd share
in Rs.4,93,636/- in the Judgment dated 21.01.2017.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6544
HC-KAR
Aggrieved by the said Judgment, the appellants herein
preferred appeal in R.A.No.20/2017, but it was dismissed for
default on 02.11.2021. They requested to restore the same
and contended that, the Judgment of the trial Court is not on
proper appreciation of facts. The counsel engaged by them
expired. On receipt of notice, they engaged another counsel,
but due to lack of communication they did not appear before
the Court and it was dismissed for default on 02.11.2021.
When they came to know about the said order, they
approached the Court for restoration. The appellant No.3 is a
widow and she is maintaining the entire family. She along
with her children are entitled for service benefits of her
husband, thus, requested this Court to set aside the order
dated 10.03.2025.
3. Heard the arguments of both sides and perused
the records.
4. P.W.1 stated before the trial Court that, her
counsel on record expired and the Junior counsel did not look
into the case, as such, it was dismissed on 02.11.2021. She
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6544
HC-KAR
is a Government Employee and she was busy with the work
and she could not contact the Junior Counsel. Later she
obtained certified copy of the order sheet dated 02.11.2021
and marked it as Ex.P.1. The trial Court observed that, she
received Court notice and met the Junior counsel. She has
stated that, she has done B.A. and B.Ed and she is working
as B.E.O. and her daughters are Engineers. After receiving
the Court notice, four years time was granted, but they did
not appear and contest the matter and accordingly it was
dismissed.
5. P & SC No.2/2014 is filed by the appellants herein
for issuance of the Succession Certificate regarding the fixed
deposits standing in the name of Pundalikappa and his wife.
The Court in its Judgment dated 21.01.2017 considering the
entire evidence on record, ordered for issuance of Succession
Certificate, but stated that the petitioner Nos.1 to
3/appellants herein are entitled for 1/3rd share in the fixed
deposits standing in the name of Pundalikappa to an extent
of Rs.4,40,939/- and respondent Nos.1 and 2 are entitled for
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6544
HC-KAR
1/3rd share each. Aggrieved by the said order, they preferred
appeal. But during the pendency of the appeal as they could
not pursue the appeal, the same was dismissed for default.
The appeal was filed in the year 2017, but they kept quite
without making proper representation till 02.11.2021, as
such, after giving due opportunity, it was dismissed. Against
the same, they preferred Civil Miscellaneous No.9/2022 and
it was dismissed on 10.03.2025. Against the said order, this
appeal is filed. The appellants herein have filed
R.A.No.2/2017 against the order of the trial Court in P & SC
No.2/2014 dated 21.01.2017, but they have not pursued the
litigation with due diligence. After the death of their counsel
they received Court notice and they also met the Junior
counsel. The Court granted sufficient opportunity of four
years and rightly dismissed the application on 02.11.2021
and they filed restoration. It was also dismissed on
10.03.2025.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:6544
HC-KAR
6. By considering all the aspects this Court finds that
there are no merits in the appeal and the appeal is devoid of
merits and is dismissed.
sd/-
(P SREE SUDHA)
JUDGE
SVH
