Dismissed¶39

Mailappa Gowda v. Smt Janaki

Karnataka HC21 Nov 2025CRP/344/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay; Section 5 Limitation Act application dismissed; Section 115 CPC civil revision petition; withdrawal of CRP on counsel's memo; liberty to file RSA under Section 100 CPC; exclusion of time under Section 14 Limitation Act; R.A.No.21/2017; I.A.No.1; Prl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Belthangady; Dakshina Kannada; impugned order held appealable as amounting to decree; decision dated 21.11.2025.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for — liberty to prefer RSA under Section 100 of CPC challenging the impugned order; time spent before this Court excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. ¶39

Mailappa Gowda Vs Smt Janaki — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:48273 CRP No. 344 of 2018

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.344 OF 2018(IO)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MAILAPPA GOWDA S/O BABU GOWDA AGED ABOTU 52 YEARS AGRICULTURIST RESIDENT OF UMIYA HOUSE, KOYYURU VILLAGE, BELTHANGADY TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT – 574214

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI G.RAVISHANKAR FOR SRI GANGADHARAPPA A V, ADVOCATES)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

SMT JANAKI W/O MANJAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS

¶15

NARNAPPA GOWDA S/O BABU GOWDA SINCE DEAD BY LRS.

¶16

2(a) SMT.VARIJA W/O LATE NARNAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS

¶17

2(b) DEJAPPA S/O LATE NARNAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:48273 CRP No. 344 of 2018

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

2(c) SMT. DURGAVATHI D/O LATE NARNAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

¶22

2(d) DINESH S/O LATE NARNAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS

¶23

ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF NAVLE HOUSE, BANDARU VILLAGE, BELTHANGADY TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT -574214

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(R1, R2(a) ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; NOTICE TO R2(b) TO (d) IS HELD SUFFICIENT)

¶26

THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.04.2018 PASSED ON I.A.No.1 IN R.A.No.21/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BELTHANGADY, D.K, DISMISSING THE I.A.No.1 FILED UNDER SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT.

¶27

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

Memo dated 21.11.2025 is filed by the learned counsel

¶31

for the revision petitioner which reads as under:

¶32

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC:48273 CRP No. 344 of 2018

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

“The above petition is filed challenging the Order dated 26.08.2018 passed by the Court of Prl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Belthangady in R.A.No.21/2017 dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking for condonation of delay in filing the appeal and also the appeal.

¶36

The impugned Order amounts to decree and it is appealable order to be challenged by preferring RSA before this Hon’ble Court under Section 100 of CPC. Hence it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner to withdraw the above petition with liberty to file RSA challenging the impugned Order.

¶37

The registry of this Hon’ble Court may kindly be ordered to return the certified copies in order to enable the petitioner to file appeal.”

¶38