Dismissed

Basappa a/F Ningappa Ichchangi, v. Puttavva W/O Kariyappa Danakattavar

Karnataka HC2 Mar 2017RSA/100322/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an application challenging the satisfaction of the decision below. The court held that the reasons for condoning a delay of 2009 days were insufficient and dismissed the limitation application, consequently dismissing the appeal.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was dismissed, and the appeal was dismissed.

Basappa a/F Ningappa Ichchangi, Vs Puttavva… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2017)

¶1

: 1 :

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF MARCH, 2017

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

¶6

R.S.A. NO. 100322/2016 (PART.SEP.POSS.)

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

BASAPPA A/F NINGAPPA ICHCHANGI, AGE:42 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O: SURANAGI, TQ: SHIRAHATTI, DIST: GADAG.-561102.

¶9

... APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI.B.V.SOMAPUR, ADV.)

¶11

AND

¶12

PUTTAVVA W/O KARIYAPPA DANAKATTAVAR, (SINCE DECEASED BY HIS L.RS.,) 1A. FAKKIRAPPA S/O KARIYAPPA DANAKATTAVAR, AGE:49 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O: SURANAGI, TQ: SHIRAHATTI, DIST: GADAG.-561102.

¶13

1B. SHARAVVA D/O KARIYAPPA DANAKATTAVAR, AGE:45 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O: SURANAGI, TQ: SHIRAHATTI, DIST: GADAG.-561102

¶14

PARAVVA W/O FAKKIRAPPA DANAKATTAVAR, AGE:68 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE,

¶15

: 2 :

¶16

R/O: SURANAGI, TQ: SHIRAHATTI, DIST: GADAG.-561102.

¶17

... RESPONDENTS

¶18

THIS RSA IS FILED U/SEC.100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD:13.07.2010 PASSED IN R.A.NO.20/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, GADAG, SITTING, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DTD:29.09.2009, PASSED IN O.S. NO.21/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE FIRST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.), & CJM, GADAG, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.

¶19

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THIS COURT, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

The application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is filed for condoning the delay of 2009 days delay in filing the appeal. It is stated that after judgement and decree in R.A.No.20/2007, the appellant did not take steps to prefer an appeal only for the reasons that his elders and well wishers intervened stating that they would try to settle the matter. In spite of this, the respondent No.1 initiated the final decree proceedings and even thereafter, the appellant waited with a hope

¶22

: 3 :

¶23

that the matter will be settled by the elders and the well wishes.

¶24

The reasons given in the affidavit are not sufficient enough to condone the delay. Therefore, the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed.

¶25

Sd/JUDGE

¶26

Vmb

Basappa a/F Ningappa Ichchangi, v. Puttavva W/O Kariyappa Danakattavar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basappa a/F Ningappa Ichchangi, v. Puttavva W/O Kariyappa Danakattavar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivarayappa Nagappa Sonagar, Vs Deputy Commissioner

Fatima Vs Shamimbanu

Basappa Kallappa Chavadi Vs Channabasappa Shankarappa Hugar

Prakash Vs Mohan

Venkatesh S/O Hanumanthappa Korawar Vs Sujata W/O Venkatesh Korawar

Smt.Shagufta Vs M/S Ganesh Finance Corporation