Allowed¶35

Maruti S/O Bhimappa Karaganvi v. Girigouda S/O Sidagouda Patil

Karnataka HC24 Jun 2025RFA/100110/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC, Dharwad Bench (NC: 2025:KHC-D:7983-DB), RFA No. 100110 of 2019, decided 24-06-2025, oral judgment per R. Nataraj J. with Rajesh Rai K J.; defendant Maruti appealed under Section 96 read with Order 41 Rule 1 CPC against specific-performance decree in O.S. No.98/2017; parties cancelled the 03.07.2013 sale agreement (Regn. No.RBG-1-04537–2023-24); appeal allowed, decree set aside, full court fee refund directed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; impugned judgment and decree for specific performance set aside; office directed to return the entire court fee to the appellant; pending applications disposed of. ¶35

Maruti S/O Bhimappa Karaganvi Vs Girigouda S/O Sidagouda Patil — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:7983-DB RFA No. 100110 of 2019

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF JUNE 2025

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ

¶8

AND

¶9

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

¶10

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.100110 OF 2019 (SP)

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

MARUTI, S/O. BHIMAPPA KARAGANVI, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, R/O. MUGALKOD VILLAGE, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI-591235.

¶13

…APPELLANT

¶14

(BY SRI. S S BAWAKHAN, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.06.26 10:16:37 +0530

¶17

GIRIGOUDA, S/O. SIDAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, R/O. MUGALKHOD VILLAGE, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI-591235.

¶18

…RESPONDENT

¶19

(BY SRI. JAGADISH PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶20

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.02.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO.98/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS RAIBAG, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT.

¶21

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7983-DB RFA No. 100110 of 2019

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ AND

¶25

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ)

¶28

This is an appeal filed by the defendant challenging the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2018 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Raibag, in O.S. No.98/2017 by which the defendant was directed to conclude the sale transaction of the suit property in favour of the plaintiff.

¶29

When this appeal was listed for final hearing, it is brought to the notice of the Court that the plaintiff and the defendant had cancelled the agreement of sale dated 03.07.2013 which was the suit document in O.S. No.98/2017. It is also stated that the cancellation was evidenced by a document, which was registered as No.RBG-1-04537–2023-24, at the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Raibag. A memo along with the copy of the document bearing No.RBG-1-04537–2023-24 is filed and the same is taken on record.

¶30

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC-D:7983-DB RFA No. 100110 of 2019

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

The learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff

¶34

admits that the sale agreement dated 03.07.2013 is cancelled.

¶35

In view of the above, nothing survives for consideration in this appeal. Consequently, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed and the impugned judgment and decree for specific performance is set aside.

¶36

Since the parties have amicably settled the dispute, the appellant is entitled for refund of court fee. Hence, the office is directed to return the entire court fee to the appellant.

¶37

All pending applications stand disposed of.

¶38

Sd/(R.NATARAJ) JUDGE

¶39

Sd/(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE

¶40

KMS Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27

Maruti S/O Bhimappa Karaganvi v. Girigouda S/O Sidagouda Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maruti S/O Bhimappa Karaganvi v. Girigouda S/O Sidagouda Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Yallappa S/O Ningappa Gujjanavar Vs Smt. Paravva W/O Hanumantappa Amminabhavi

Shri. Pandurang S/O Kallappa Shintre Vs Smt. Shanta W/O Jayawant Jadhav

Subhasagoud S/O Goudappagoud Patil Vs Basavaraj S/O Shiddappa Desai

Nirmala Nagappa Doddawad Vs the State of Karnataka

Hanamantagouda S/O Goudappagouda Patil Vs Smt.Parwatewwa W/Io Mahadevppa Naduvinamani

Smt.Prema W/O. Anant Tahasildar Vs Sou. Prabha W/O. Balawant Angolkar