Karnataka High Court
Smt Taradevi W/O Krishna Alias ... vs Smt Radha K L Alias Smt Radha Kisanchand on 9 September, 2025
Author: S.R. Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R. Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB
RFA No. 100285 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100285 OF 2025 (-)
BETWEEN:
SMT. TARADEVI
W/O. KRISHNA @ KRISHNAPPA LAMANI,
AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. SECTOR NO.44, NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT,
DISTRICT: BAGALKOT-587 101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT. RADHA K.L. @ SMT. RADHA KISANCHAND,
AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
YASHAVANT
R/O. LOKANATH BUILDING, MUCHAKHANDI CROSS,
NARAYANKAR BAGALKOT, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT-587101.
...RESPONDENT
Digitally signed by
YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B. HIREMATH &
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD
MS. GAYATRI S.R., ADVOCATES)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., PRAYING
TO ALLOW THE APPEAL, SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
DECREE DATED 15.04.2025 PASSED BY THE COURT OF
PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE, BAGALKOT IN O.S.NO.288/2024, AND DISMISS
THE SUIT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB
RFA No. 100285 of 2025
HC-KAR
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA)
The present appeal is filed under Section 96 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 19081, by the appellant/defendant challenging
the judgment and decree dated 15.04.2025 passed in
O.S.No.288/2024 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM,
Bagalkot2, whereunder, the suit for specific performance of
contract filed by the respondent/plaintiff has been decreed by
the Trial Court.
2. The parties will be referred to as per their ranking
before the Trial Court, for the sake of convenience.
3. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant
agreed to sell the suit property to the plaintiff, and accordingly,
the parties entered into an agreement of sale dated 25.05.2015,
whereunder the defendant agreed to sell the suit property for a
Hereinafter referred to as the 'CPC'
Hereinafter referred to as the 'Trial Court'
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB
HC-KAR
total consideration of ₹29,11,000/-. That the plaintiff paid a sum
of ₹10,00,000/- as earnest money. As the defendant did not
come forward to complete the sale transaction, the plaintiff got
issued legal notices dated 17.11.2023 and 05.09.2024. Since the
defendant failed to receive the said notices, the plaintiff has filed
a suit for specific performance of the contract before the Trial
Court.
4. Although the suit summons was duly served on the
defendant, he has remained ex parte.
5. Based on the pleadings of the parties, the Trial Court
framed the following points for consideration:
"1.Whether the plaintiff has proved that, the
defendant had executed in her favour the agreement of
sale dated:25/05/2015 and received from her a sum of
Rs. 10,00,000/- as an earnest money?
2.Whether the plaintiff has further proved that, she
has always been ready and willing to perform her part
of contract?
3.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of
Specific Performance?
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB
HC-KAR
4.What order or decree?"
6. The power of attorney holder of the plaintiff
examined himself as PW.1. The plaintiff also examined attesting
witness as PW.2 and got marked documents as Exs.P1 to Ex.P8.
The Trial Court, by its judgment and decree dated 15.04.2025,
decreed the suit and passed the following:
ORDER
That, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed with costs.
That, the defendant is hereby directed to execute
the registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff by
receiving the balance sale consideration amount of
Rs. 19,11,000/- within two months from the date of
this order and if the defendant fails to execute the said
registered sale deed within the said period, then the
plaintiff is at liberty to get execute the said registered
sale deed in her favour at the costs of the defendant in
accordance with law.
That, draw the decree accordingly."
7. Being aggrieved, the defendant has filed the present
appeal.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB
HC-KAR
8. Along with the above appeal, I.A.No.2/2025 is filed
under Order XLI Rule 27 of the CPC to produce two documents
i.e., order sheet of the Trial Court as well as a copy of the grant
order dated 17.01.2006 issued by the Bagalkot Town
Development Authority in favour of mother of the appellant.
9. Heard the submissions of learned counsel for the
appellant/defendant as well as the learned counsel for the
respondent/plaintiff.
10. Although the defendant has raised various
contentions on the merits of the matter by contending, inter alia,
that the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court is liable
to be interfered with on the ground that the suit is barred by
limitation and that the plaintiff has not demonstrated his
entitlement for specific performance of the agreement dated
25.05.2015, it is evident that the defendant did not enter
appearance before the Trial Court and did not contest the suit on
its merits.
11. The learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff
vehemently opposing I.A.No.2/2025 contends that the grant
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB
HC-KAR
order dated 17.01.2006, which has been produced along with
I.A.No.2/2025 is a photocopy, and the same cannot be taken on
record.
12. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and
having perused the material on record including the records of
the trial Court, the following points arise for consideration:
i) Whether IA No.2/2025 is required to be allowed?
ii) Whether the judgment and decree passed by the trial
Court is liable to be interfered with?
Regarding Question No.(i):
13. It is forthcoming from the averments made in the
affidavit accompanying IA No.2/2025 that the same pertain to
the merits of the matter and the appellant-defendant not having
contested the suit of the respondent-plaintiff on its merits before
the Trial Court, the contention put forth by the appellant-
defendant on the merits of the matter is required to be
adjudicated by the Trial Court after affording an opportunity to
the appellant-defendant in that regard. For the said purpose it is
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB
HC-KAR
just and proper that IA No.2/2025 be allowed and the documents
produced along with the application be taken on record subject
to affording an opportunity to the defendant to produce the grant
order dated 17.01.2006 or its certified copy before the Trial
Court. Hence, question No.(i) framed for consideration is
answered in the affirmative.
Regarding Question No.(ii):
14. As noticed above, it is clear that the defendant did
not enter appearance before the Trial Court and did not contest
the suit of the respondent-plaintiff on its merits. Having regard
to the fact that valuable rights of the parties have been
adjudicated by the Trial Court, including right, title and interest
in immovable property, it is just and proper that before such an
adjudication is made, the appellant-defendant be afforded with
another opportunity to contest the suit before the Trial Court on
its merits. For the said purpose, it is just and proper that the
judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court be set aside and
the matter be remitted back to the Trial Court for fresh
consideration in accordance with law. Hence, question No.(ii)
framed for consideration is answered in the affirmative.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB
HC-KAR
15. Hence, the following:
ORDER
i) IA No.2/2025 is allowed and the documents
produced along with the application are taken on
record, reserving liberty to the appellant-
defendant to produce the grant order dated
17.01.2006 or its certified copy before the trial
Court;
ii) The appeal is allowed;
iii) The judgment and decree dated 15.04.2025
passed in O.S.No.288/2024 on the file of Principal
Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Bagalkot, is set
aside;
iv) Both the parties shall appear before the Trial
Court on 15.10.2025 without the requirement of
any further notice being issued in this regard;
v) The appellant-defendant shall file his written
statement on the date of his appearance before
the trial Court i.e. on 15.10.2025;
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11592-DB
HC-KAR
vi) Consequent to the appearance of the parties
and the filing of the written statement by the
defendant, the Trial Court shall conduct further
proceedings in accordance with law, by affording
an opportunity to both parties to adduce oral and
documentary evidence;
vii) All the contentions of the parties on the merits
of the matter are kept open;
viii) The Court fee paid by the appellant in the
above appeal be refunded to the appellant.
Sd/-
(S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(C.M. POONACHA)
JUDGE
PMP
CT-MCK
