Karnataka High Court
Smt Nagaveni W/O. Ashok Tandel vs Shri Prashant S/O. Baburao Shinde on 27 October, 2025
Author: R.Devdas
Bench: R.Devdas
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14314-DB
RFA No. 100475 of 2025
C/W RFA No. 100476 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100475 OF 2025 (POS)
C/W REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100476 OF 2025
IN RFA NO.100475 OF 2025:
BETWEEN:
SMT. NAGAVENI W/O. ASHOK TANDEL,
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
R/O. SAYADHRI APARTMENT,
M.G. ROAD, NEAR S.P. OFFICE,
KAJUBAG, KARWAR-581301.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. UROOJAHMED J.HAVALDAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SYED NAZEER, SRI. AHMED QUADRI, ADVOATES)
Digitally signed
by AND:
MOHANKUMAR
B SHELAR
Location: HIGH SHRI. PRASHANT S/O. BABURAO SHINDE
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
DHARWAD
BENCH R/O. SADASHIVGAD, KARWAR-581352.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. GIRISH YADAWAD, ADVOCATE)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH
ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC 1908, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 04.08.2025 PASSED
BY THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
J.M.F.C., KARWAR, UTTAR KANNADA IN O.S.NO.28/2023 FOR
NOT CONSIDERING THE COUNTER CLAIM FILED BY THE
APPELLANT.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14314-DB
RFA No. 100475 of 2025
C/W RFA No. 100476 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN RFA NO.100476 OF 2025:
BETWEEN:
SMT. NAGAVENI W/O. ASHOK TANDEL,
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
R/O. SAYADHRI APARTMENT,
M.G. ROAD, NEAR S.P. OFFICE,
KAJUBAG, KARWAR-581301.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. UROOJAHMED J.HAVALDAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SYED NAZEER, SRI. AHMED QUADRI, ADVOATES)
AND:
SHRI. PRASHANT S/O. BABURAO SHINDE
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. SADASHIVGAD, KARWAR-581352.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. GIRISH YADAWAD, SRI. RAHUL S.KUNTOJI, AND
SMT. DIVYA J.DESHPANDE, ADVOCATES FOR
CAVEAT RESPONDENT)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH
ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC.1908, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 04.08.2025 PASSED
BY THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
J.M.F.C., KARWAR, UTTAR KANNADA IN O.S.NO.28/2023.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14314-DB
RFA No. 100475 of 2025
C/W RFA No. 100476 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS)
These two Regular First Appeals are filed by the
defendant in the suit. Two appeals are filed because the suit
of the plaintiff for possession is allowed and the counter
claim filed by the defendant has been rejected. However, it
is clear that the counter claim was rejected since the court
fee was not paid on the counter claim made by the
defendant.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant has today filed
a memo along with copy of the legal notice dated
22.09.2025 got issued by the appellant to the learned
counsel who was appearing for the defendant in the suit.
Learned counsel submits that along with the memo, the
bank statement of the appellant is also furnished showing
transfer of Rs.1,35,000/- in favour of the learned counsel
for payment of the court fee on the counter claim made by
the defendant. However, the learned counsel failed to
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14314-DB
HC-KAR
deposit the court fee, and as a consequence, the counter
claim made by the defendant has been rejected, although
the application for counter claim was earlier allowed by the
trial court. Learned counsel would therefore submit that the
matter should be reconsidered by the trial court by
permitting the defendant to pay the court fee on the
counter claim. The learned counsel would also add that
there was no specific direction given by the trial court to the
defendant to pay the court fee on the counter claim.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff
submits that although the trial court has rightly allowed the
suit while passing a judgment and decree in favour of the
plaintiff directing the defendant to handover the possession
of the residential apartment which is the suit schedule
property to the plaintiff, nevertheless, instead of getting the
matter considered at the hands of this court only on the
ground of non-payment of the court fee at the hands of the
defendant on the counter claim, it would be in the interest
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14314-DB
HC-KAR
of both the parties to get the matter reconsidered on the
defendant paying the court fee on the counter claim.
4. Submission of the learned counsel for the
respondent/plaintiff is placed on record.
5. In view of the above discussion, this court is of
the considered opinion that the impugned judgment and
decree is required to be set aside for reconsideration of the
matter on merits. Accordingly, this court proceeds to pass
the following:
ORDER
i) The appeals are allowed.
ii) The impugned judgment and decree dated
04.08.2025 passed by the learned Additional
Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Karwar, Uttara
Kannada in O.S.No.28/2023 is hereby quashed
and set aside.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14314-DB
HC-KAR
iii) The matter stands remitted back to the trial
court with a direction to the defendant to pay the
court fee on the counter claim within 15 days
from 10.11.2025.
iv) Having regard to the fact that the parties have
already lead evidence, nevertheless, for
additional evidence, if any, some time may be
required. The trial court shall make endeavour to
dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible,
and at any rate within a period of six months
from 10.11.2025.
v) The parties are directed to appear before the trial
court on 10.11.2025 without waiting for further
notice.
vi) The office is directed to transmit the TCR to the
trial court forthwith to enable the defendant to
pay the court fee and the court shall reconsider
the matter on merits.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:14314-DB
HC-KAR
vii) Office is directed to return the court fee, in
accordance with law, having regard to the
decision of this court to remand the matter back
to the trial court.
Sd/-
(R.DEVDAS)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(B. MURALIDHARA PAI)
JUDGE
MBS
Ct:vh
