Allowed

Sri Kariyappa H.M. v. H M Munawar Pasha

Karnataka HC13 Dec 2023RFA/1929/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed the appeal filed by unsuccessful plaintiffs in a recovery suit. Permission was granted to produce additional bank statements. The impugned judgment of the Trial Court was set aside, and the matter remitted for fresh consideration. Court fees were refunded.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment set aside; case remitted to Trial Court; application to produce additional documents allowed; court fees refunded.

Sri Kariyappa H.M. Vs H M Munawar Pasha — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

NC: 2023:KHC:45362 RFA No. 1929 of 2023

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1929 OF 2023 (MON)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI KARIYAPPA H.M. DEAD BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES

¶8

SMT LAKSHMAMMA

¶9

W/O LATE KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS REP BY GPA HOLDER SMT PADMA

¶10

W/O LATE KARIYAPPA H M AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

¶11

PADMA

¶12

W/O LATE KARIYAPPA H M AGED 55 YEARS

¶13

MADHURI

¶14

Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

D/O LATE KARIYAPPA H M AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS

¶16

ALL ARE R/AT, VALLABAI ROAD,.4^TH CROSS HASSAN 573 201.

¶17

…APPELLANTS

¶18

(BY SRI. CHETHAN B.,ADVOCATE)

¶19

AND:

¶20

H M MUNAWAR PASHA DEAD BY LEGAL REPRESENTASIVES

¶21

SMT SARVATH ABZA W/O LATE H M MUNAWAR PASHA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

¶22

¶23

NC: 2023:KHC:45362 RFA No. 1929 of 2023

¶24

H M ABDUL RAZAQ

¶25

W/O LATE H. MUNAWAR PASHA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

¶26

H.M. ABDUL FARAZ

¶27

W/O LATE. H.M. MUNAWAR PASHA

¶28

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS.

¶29

SMT H M AYESHA SIDDIQUE W/O LATE H M MUNAWAR PASHA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS

¶30

ALL ARE R/O H M M MANZIL, 5^TH CROSS AADARSHA NAGARA HASSAN 573 201.

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(R-1 TO R-4 ARE SERVED)

¶33

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 R/W ORDER 451 RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 7.07.2023 PASSED IN OS NO.91/2018 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, HASSAN., DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY.

¶34

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

¶35

JUDGMENT

¶36

This appeal by the unsuccessful plaintiffs in O.S.No.91/2018

¶37

is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 07.07.2023 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Hassan, whereby the said suit filed by the appellants – plaintiffs against the respondents – defendants seeking recovery of a sum of Rs.14,61,000/- together with interest from the defendants, was dismissed by the Trial Court.

¶38

¶39

NC: 2023:KHC:45362 RFA No. 1929 of 2023

¶40

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the

¶41

material on record.

¶42

The respondents having been served with notice of the appeal have chosen to remain unrepresented and have not contested the appeal.

¶43

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the appellants – plaintiffs instituted the aforesaid suit interalia contending that the respondents – defendants borrowed the aforesaid sum from the appellants and since they did not repay the same, appellants were constrained to institute the aforesaid suit.

¶44

The defendants entered appearance and contested the

¶45

suit by filing the written statement. On perusal, the Trial Court framed the following issues:

¶46

“1. Whether the Plaintiff proves that the Defendant availed loan of a sum of Rs.9,05,000/- from the Plaintiff?

¶47

2. Whether the Plaintiff further proves that the Defendant issued two cheques in order to discharge his liability towards the Plaintiff?

¶48

3. Whether the Defendant proves that he had issued two cheques as surety for the money transaction as contended in Para No.6 of the written statement?

¶49

4. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to recover a sum of Rs.14,61,000/- from the Defendant?

¶50

¶51

NC: 2023:KHC:45362 RFA No. 1929 of 2023

¶52

5. Whether the Defendant proves that the Plaintiff has not paid the proper Court fee on the plaint?

¶53

6. What decree or order?”

¶54

The plaintiff examined herself as PW.1 and two witnesses

¶55

as PW.2 and PW.3 and documents at Ex.P1 to P14 were marked. Defendant examined himself as DW.1 and one witness as DW.2 and documents at Ex.D1 were marked on their behalf.

¶56

After hearing the parties, the Trial Court rejected the claim of the appellants on the ground that the bank statement evidencing the payment made by the appellants to the defendants was not produced by the plaintiffs before the Trial Court.

¶57

In this regard, the appellant has filed an application I.A.No.1/2023 under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC for permission to produce additional documents viz, the bank statement issued by Canara Bank in relation to the subject matter of the suit.

¶58

A perusal of the said bank statement will indicate that the same is relevant and material for adjudication of the issues in controversy between the parties, particularly in the light of the specific findings, recorded by the Trial Court at para No. 16 of the impugned judgment and decree as regards non production of the bank statement. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that

¶59

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:45362 RFA No. 1929 of 2023

¶60

the additional documents / evidence is relevant and necessary for disposal of the present appeal and I.A.No.1/2023 is accordingly allowed.

¶61

Having allowed I.A.No.1/2023, since an opportunity would have to be provided in favour of the respondents to contest the said documents and also to lead additional evidence, if any, it would be also necessary to set aside the impugned judgment and decree dated 07.07.2023 in O.S.No.91/2018 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Hassan, and remit the matter back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

¶62

In the result, I pass the following:

¶63

ORDER

¶64

i) Appeal is hereby allowed.

¶65

ii) Impugned judgment and decree dated 07.07.2023 in O.S.No.91/2018 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Hassan, is hereby set aside.

¶66

iii) I.A.No.1/2023 to produce additional documents, is hereby allowed.

¶67

¶68

NC: 2023:KHC:45362 RFA No. 1929 of 2023

¶69

iv) The matter is remitted back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

¶70

v) The registry is directed to transmit I.A.No.1/2023 along with the documents as well as the Trial Court records, back to the Trial Court for consideration in accordance with law.

¶71

vi) Appellants undertake to appear before the Trial Court on 08.01.2024 without awaiting any further notice from the Trial Court.

¶72

vii) The Trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit within a period of six months from 08.01.2024 .

¶73

viii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the parties to adduce additional evidence in support of their claim.

¶74

ix) The registry is directed to refund the entire (100%) court fee paid on the Memorandum of Appeal in terms of Section 64 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act.

¶75

Sd/- JUDGE

¶76

DHA

¶77

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60

Sri Kariyappa H.M. v. H M Munawar Pasha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Kariyappa H.M. v. H M Munawar Pasha

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

Sri. R.K Rudraradhya Vs Sri. R Rudraradhya

Smt Leelavathi Vs Sri Vinodkumar Choudary

Sri. Muniyappa Vs Sri. Govinda

Sri K Munikrishnappa Vs Smt. Dilshad Begum

Vasavi Condiments and Food Courts Vs Smt. Puttamma

G Janardhan Vs Karnataka Prakruthi Chikitsa Prachara Trust