Karnataka High Court
Mahadevanaika Since Dead By Her Lrs ... vs Banaranaika on 11 September, 2025
Author: V Srishananda
Bench: V Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:36024
RSA No. 165 of 2021
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 165 OF 2021 (PAR)
BETWEEN:
1. MAHADEVANAIKA SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS
SIDDAMMA
D/O MAHADEVANAIKA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
RESIDING AT
AMMANAPURA VILLAGE
CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK
PIN-571117
2. SHIVANNANAIKA
S/O LATE MAHADEVANAIKA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
RESIDING AT JYOTHIGOWDANAPURA VILLAGE
CHANDAKAVADI HOBLI
Digitally CHAMARAJANAGARA TALUK
signed by R PIN-571117
MANJUNATHA
Location:
HIGH COURT 3. GOWRAMMA
OF W/O MAHADEVANAIKA
KARNATAKA
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
RESIDING AT JYOTHIGOWDANAPURA VILLAGE
CHANDAKAVADI HOBLI
CHAMARAJANAGARA TALUK
PIN-571117
4. PUTTANANJAMMA
W/O LATE MAHADEVANAIKA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
1 TO 4 ARE RESIDING
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:36024
RSA No. 165 of 2021
HC-KAR
JYOTHIGOWDANAPURA VILLAGE
CHANDAKAVADI HOBLI
CHAMARAJANAGARA TALUK
PIN-571117
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. B V BADRINATH.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. BANARANAIKA
S/O LATE CHIKKARANGANAIKA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
RESIDING AT
JYOTHIGOWDANAPURA VILLAGE
CHANDAKAVADI HOBLI
CHAMARAJANAGARA TALUK
PIN-571117
2. NANJUNDANAIKA
S/O LATE CHIKKARANGANAIKA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
RESIDING AT
JYOTHIGOWDANAPURA VILLAGE
CHANDAKAVADI HOBLI
CHAMARAJANAGARA TALUK
PIN-571117
3. NANJUNDANAIKA J C SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS
NANJUNDANAIKA
S/O LATE NANJUNDANAIKA J C
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
RESIDING AT JYOTHIGOWDANAPURA VILLAGE
CHANDAKAVADI HOBLI
CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN-571117
4. RAVI
S/O LATE NANJUNDANAIKA J C
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
RESIDING AT JYOTHIGOWDANAPURA VILLAGE
CHANDAKAVADI HOBLI
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:36024
RSA No. 165 of 2021
HC-KAR
CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN-571117
5. MANIKANTA
S/O LATE NANJUNDANAIKA J C
AGED ABOUT YEARS,
RESIDING AT JYOTHIGOWDANAPURA VILLAGE
CHANDAKAVADI HOBLI
CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN-571117
6. SHARADA
W/O DEVARAJU
D/O LATE NANJUNDANAIKA J C
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
RESIDING AT PALYA VILLAGE
KOLLEGALA TALUK
CHMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN-571117
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P NATARAJU.,ADVOCATE FOR R1(A TO D) AND R2;
R3, R4, R5 AND R6 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.11.2019
PASSED IN RA.NO.72/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHAMARAJNAGARA,
ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
AND DECREE DATED 17.07.2017 PASSED IN OS.NO.256/2009
ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN)
CHAMARAJANAGARA.
THIS RSA, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:36024
RSA No. 165 of 2021
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard Sri. B.V.Badrinath, learned counsel appearing
for the appellants and Sri. P.Nataraju, learned counsel for
respondent Nos.1(a to d) and 2.
2. The matter is listed for admission on the following
substantial questions of law:
"1. Does the first appellate court is justified in
decreeing the suit of the respondents 1 and 2 without
considering oral and documentary evidence?
2. Does the first appellate court is justified in
decreeing the suit Item No.5 without considering
E.X.D12 and D13 which are unchallenged and unrebutted
by the respondents 1 and 2?
3. Does the first appellate Court is justified in
decreeing the suit in the absence of non-joinder of
necessary parties to the suit?
4. Does the first appellate court is justified in
considering the scope of Section 6 (Amendment) Act of
2005 on the facts of the case in coming to the conclusion
that the said Section is prospective and retroactive in
operation necessitating for partition of the suit schedule
properties?"
3. Taking note of the fact that the First Appellate
Court has not assigned any reasons for concurring with the
judgment of the Trial Court, especially when the share is
NC: 2025:KHC:36024
HC-KAR
granted based on the mutation entry alone, matter
requires to be re-adjudicated by the First Appellate Court
in the light of the contentions raised on behalf of the
parties, especially with regard to the nature of property.
4. Sri. P.Nataraju, learned counsel for respondent
Nos.1(a to d) and 2 fairly submits that the First Appellate
Court has not recorded proper reasons in dismissing the
appeal of defendants and therefore, matter be remitted to
First Appellate Court for fresh disposal of the appeal in
accordance with law.
5. In view of the above, without adverting to the
merits of the substantial questions of law, following order
is passed.
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed.
ii) The impugned judgment dated 22.11.2019
on the file of the learned Additional Senior
NC: 2025:KHC:36024
HC-KAR
Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Chamarajanagara
in RA.No.72/2017, is hereby set aside.
iii) Matter is remitted to the First Appellate
Court for fresh disposal in accordance with
law.
iv) Taking note of the fact that, the appeal is of
the year 2017, appeal needs to be disposed
as early as possible.
v) In that regard, parties shall appear before
the First Appellate Court without further
notice on 26.09.2025.
vi) The First Appellate Court shall dispose of
the appeal as early as possible.
Sd/-
(V SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE
PHM
