This court dismissed a regular first appeal filed under Section 96 CPC regarding a partition dispute. The court held that the appeal does not survive because the underlying dispute was settled out of court in the final decree proceedings.
Appeal dismissed as it does not survive for consideration.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100134 OF 2014 (PAR-)
BETWEEN:
ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR S. ARANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
2a. ANNAPURANA W/O. SUBHAS GULREDDI, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. BETAGERI BADAVANE GADAG.
2b. LAXMANGOUDA S/O. SHIVANGOUDA HOSMANI, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SANTOJI ONI, RON, DIST: GADAG.
2c. SURESH S/O. SHIVANGOUDA HOSMANI. AGE:40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SANTOJI ONI, RON, DIST: GADAG.
W/O. BASAVARAJ KAVALUR, AGE: 44 YEARS, R/O. GOKUL ROAD, LOHIYANAGAR, NEAR GIRINAGAR, HUBLI.
DIST: KOPPAL.
DIST: GADAG.
23a. RENUKA W/O. BASAVANTAPPA TUMBAD AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: GOUDAR ONI, RON, TQ: RON, DIST: GADAG – 582209.
23b. ASUSUYA W/O. DESAIAPPA DESAI, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O AT AND PO HULIGAHAL, TQ: HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT – 587112.
23c. NEELANGOUDA S/O SHIVANAGOUDA HIREGOUDAR, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER, R/O. BASAVA NIVAS, 2ND CROSS PUNEKAR LAYOUT, SMBAPUR ROAD, GADAG-582101.
23d. LAXMANGOUDA S/O. SHIVANGOUDA HIREGOUDAR, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HOSUR, TQ: YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL – 543284.
23e. NAGANGOUDA S/O. SHIVANGOUDA HIREGOUDAR, AGE: 52 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HOSUR TQ: YELBURGA, DIST: KOPPAL-543284.
23f. DEVANGOUDA S/O SHIVANGOUDA HIREGOUDAR, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O: GINIGEREA, TQ: KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL – 583228.
23g. ANUSUYA W/O. DESAIAPPA DESAI, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, AT AND PO HULIGAHAL, TQ: HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT – 587112.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.L. PATIL AND SRI.S.S. BETURMATH, ADVOCATES FOR R1, R2A, TO R2C AND R3;
SRI. M.H. PATIL AND SRI. V.S. GADDAD, ADVOCATES FOR PROPOSED R22(A); R4- DECEASED LR’S ARE ON RECORD AS R7 TO R9; R6 – DECEASED LR’S ARE ON RECORD AS R2A TO R2C); R7 TO R9, R11, R13 TO R21, R23(A) TO R23(G) ARE SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED); NOTICE TO R5, R10, R12, R14 TO R18 ARE HELD SUFFICIENT.
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 12.06.2014 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., RON IN O.S.NO.36/2010 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
ORAL JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the present appeal is arising from a decree for partition and in the final decree proceeding, the dispute is settled. Final decree proceeding is disposed of as settled out of Court. Hence, the appeal does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed as it does not survive for
consideration.
Sd/(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE
RKM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal survives for consideration given that the dispute was settled out of court in the final decree proceedings.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SMT. DRAXAYANI W/O. VEERUPAXAPPA
SMT. SAVITRI W/O. HANUMANTHGOUDA
KUMAR VENKANGOUDA S/O. HANUMANTHGOUDA
KUMAR SHIVABSANGOUDA S/O. HANUMANTHGOUDA
SMT. BASAVANNEVVA W/O. SAKKARAGOUDA
SRI. ANDANGOUDA S/O. VEERBHADRAGOUDA
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
