Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Smt.Akkubhayi Vs Smt.Reshma B.V. — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Home
Karnataka HC
2025
Smt.Akkubhayi Vs Smt.Reshma B.V.Smt.Akkubhayi v. Smt.Reshma B.V.

Dismissed¶39

Smt.Akkubhayi v. Smt.Reshma B.V.

Karnataka HC11 Nov 2025MFA/8147/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintainability of appeal under Order XLI Rule 1(r) read with Section 104 CPC against rejection of applications under Section 151 CPC and Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC in MVC No. 5313/2024 (XXII Addl. SCJ & ACJM, Member, MACT Bengaluru, order dated 31.07.2025); MFA No. 8147 of 2025 dismissed as not maintainable; liberty to approach appropriate Court; Section 14 Limitation Act 1963 limitation exclusion; appellants Akkubhayi, Surya, Kavitha, Shivaji, Parvathi Bai vs Reshma B.V. and Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.; Karnataka HC; Hanchate Sanjeevkumar J.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as not maintainable; liberty reserved to appellants to file appeal/petition before the appropriate Court; time spent prosecuting this appeal excluded for limitation as per Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963; Registry directed to return all original copies to appellants/counsel.

Why is it important?

An appeal filed under Order XLI Rule 1(r) read with Section 104 CPC is not maintainable against an order passed on applications filed under Section 151 CPC and Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC. ¶37

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal dismissed as not maintainable; liberty reserved to appellants to file appeal/petition before the appropriate Court; time spent prosecuting this appeal excluded for limitation as per Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963; Registry directed to return all original copies to appellants/counsel.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Miscellaneous First Appeal under Order XLI Rule 1(r) read with Section 104 CPC is maintainable against the order rejecting applications filed under Section 151 CPC and Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC.

Ratio / Principle

An appeal filed under Order XLI Rule 1(r) read with Section 104 CPC is not maintainable against an order passed on applications filed under Section 151 CPC and Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (Bengaluru), Hanchate Sanjeevkumar J., decided 11-11-2025 — MFA No. 8147 of 2025 (CPC): Five appellants (a widow, two minor children represented by their mother as natural guardian, and two others), aggrieved by the order dated 31.07.2025 of the XXII Additional SCJ and ACJM, Member, MACT, Bengaluru in MVC No. 5313/2024 rejecting I.A.No.VI (Section 151 CPC) and I.A.No.VII (Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC), appealed under Order 43 Rule 1(r) CPC. Held: an appeal under Order XLI Rule 1(r) read with Section 104 CPC is not maintainable against such an order; the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty reserved to the appellants to file an appeal/petition before the appropriate Court; time spent before this Court was excluded for limitation under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963; Registry directed to return original copies to the appellants/counsel.

A

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:46410 MFA No. 8147 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8147 OF 2025 (CPC)

BETWEEN:

SMT. AKKUBHAYI W/O LATE KONDIBABA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,

MASTER SURYA, S/O. LATE KONDIBABA, AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS,

KUM. KAVITHA, D/O. LATE KONDIBABA, AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS,

Digitally signed by PAVITHRA B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

APPELLANT NO.2 AND 3 ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER

AND NATURAL GUARDIAN APPELLANT NO.1

SRI. SHIVAJI, S/O. LATE. KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,

SMT. PARVATHI BAI, S/O. SRI. SHIVAJI, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,

ALL THE ABOVE PERMANENT

R/OF MANGALURUMALA VILLAGE,

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:46410 MFA No. 8147 of 2025

HC-KAR

HAREENAHALLI POST, HANGODU POST, HUNSUR TALUK, MYSORE - 571 105.

…APPELLANTS

(BY SMT. VEENA L, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SMT.RESHMA B.V. W/O. SRI. VISHWANATH B.V., AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT IBNIVALAVADI, MADIKERI, KODAGU - 571 201.

M/S. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., TP HUB, NO. 1/2, 4TH FLOOR, 'GOLDEN HEIGHTS' COMPLEX, 59TH C CROSS, 4TH M BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 010.

…RESPONDENTS

THIS MFA IS FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31.07.2025 PASSED IN MVC.NO. 5313/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE XXII ADDITIONAL SCJ AND ACJM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, REJECTING THE IA.NO. VI AND VII FILED U/O 23 RULE 3A OF CPC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:46410 MFA No. 8147 of 2025

HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

The office has raised objection regarding

maintainability of the appeal under the order passed by the Court of Small Causes and MACT, Bengaluru.

The impugned order passed on I.A.No.VI filed under Section 151 of CPC and I.A.No.VII filed under Order XXIII Rule 3A of CPC. The said applications are rejected. Against which, the present appeal is filed.

Against the order passed on applications filed under Section 151 of CPC and also under Order XXIII Rule 3A of CPC, the appeal filed under Order XLI Rule 1(r) read with Section 104 of CPC is not maintainable.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed as not

maintainable before this Court. However, liberty is reserved to the appellants to file appeal/petition before the appropriate Court.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:46410 MFA No. 8147 of 2025

HC-KAR

The time spent for prosecuting the appeal

before this Court is excluded for the purpose of limitation

as per Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Registry is directed to return all the original

copies to the appellants/counsel for the appellants.

SD/(HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR)

JUDGE

KA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the Miscellaneous First Appeal under Order XLI Rule 1(r) read with Section 104 CPC is maintainable against the order rejecting applications filed under Section 151 CPC and Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC.¶37

Statutes considered

6 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

CPCOrder 43 Rule 1(r)¶27 Order 23 Rule 3A¶27 Section 151¶36 Order XXIII Rule 3A¶36 Order XLI Rule 1(r) read with Section 104¶37
Limitation Act, 1963Section 14¶45

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Rejection of I.A.Nos. VI and VII (filed under Section 151 CPC and Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC) in MVC No. 5313/2024¶27
XXII Additional SCJ and ACJM, Member, MACT, Bengaluru · 31.07.2025
Prior proceeding
Office/Registry raised objection regarding maintainability of the appeal against the order passed by the Court of Small Causes and MACT, Bengaluru¶35
Prior proceeding
I.A.No.VI (Section 151 CPC) and I.A.No.VII (Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC) were rejected; against which the present appeal was filed¶36

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
Smt. Akkubhayi W/o Late Kondibaba¶8
Smt. Veena L
appellant
Master Surya, S/o. Late Kondibaba¶9
Smt. Veena L
appellant
Kum. Kavitha, D/o. Late Kondibaba¶10
Smt. Veena L
appellant
Sri. Shivaji, S/o. Late. Krishna¶14
Smt. Veena L
appellant
Smt. Parvathi Bai¶15
Smt. Veena L
respondent
Smt. Reshma B.V., W/o. Sri. Vishwanath B.V.¶24
respondent
M/s. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd.¶25

Coram

AI extract

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumarauthor¶29

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 11 Nov 2025 · November
Registered: 7 Nov 2025
Case no.: MFA/8147/2025
CNR: KAHC010717442025
Bench: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: MFA

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Hanchate Sanjeevkumar

Mrs Shanthala Rajesh Prabhu Vs Mr. Gopakumar N G
10 Nov 2025
Narayanaswamy @ Ambarish Vs K Ravinder Reddy
10 Nov 2025
Sri. Karunakara Reddy Vs Smt. Rathanamma
10 Nov 2025
Smt. Faziya Farooq Vs Sri Zubair Anwar
11 Nov 2025
Smt. Saraswathi M Vs Nill
11 Nov 2025
Smt G Roopa Vs Sri Ankush Dadha
11 Nov 2025

Cite this judgement

Smt.Akkubhayi v. Smt.Reshma B.V., MFA/8147/2025 (KA), decided on 11 November 2025.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes6

CPCOrder 43 Rule 1(r) · Order 23 Rule 3A · Section 151 · Order XXIII Rule 3A · Order XLI Rule 1(r) read with Section 104
Limitation Act, 1963Section 14

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Rejection of I.A.Nos. VI and VII (filed under Section 151 CPC and Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC) in MVC No. 5313/2024XXII Additional SCJ and ACJM, Member, MACT, Bengaluru · 31.07.2025
Office/Registry raised objection regarding maintainability of the appeal against the order passed by the Court of Small Causes and MACT, Bengaluru
I.A.No.VI (Section 151 CPC) and I.A.No.VII (Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC) were rejected; against which the present appeal was filed

View full history

Bench / Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar

Parties & counsel