Shri. Babu S/O Satagouda Patil Vs the State — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shri. Babu S/O Satagouda Patil Vs the State — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular Second Appeal dismissed as withdrawn on the appellant's memo; Registry directed to look into and refund the admissible court fee in favour of the appellant; pending I.A. held not to survive for consideration.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant's Regular Second Appeal could be permitted to be withdrawn at his request made through a memo by learned counsel, with refund of the court fee paid.

Court's answer

The appellant's memo seeking withdrawal of the Regular Second Appeal was taken on record and the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

Ratio / Principle

The Registry was directed to look into and refund the admissible court fee in favour of the appellant.

Key takeaways

In view of the withdrawal of the appeal, the pending interlocutory application was held not to survive for consideration.ratio¶51

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench — NC: 2025:KHC-D:8835 — Regular Second Appeal No. 100263 of 2025 (DEC/POS), order dated 16.07.2025 per M.G.S. Kamal J. The appellant, Babu s/o Satagouda Patil, had preferred this appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against respondents including the State (through the Deputy Commissioner, Belagavi), the Panchayat Development Officer and Chairman of Gram Panchayat, Nittur, and five private individuals, challenging the judgment and decree dated 10.01.2024 in R.A. No. 6/2020 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Khanapur, confirming the judgment and decree dated 16.01.2020 in O.S. No. 275/2014 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Khanapur. Before orders, learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo stating that, upon further legal advice and careful consideration, the appellant desired to withdraw the appeal and sought liberty to seek refund of the court fee paid. The Court took the memo on record, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, directed the Registry to look into and refund the admissible court fee in favour of the appellant, and recorded that the pending I.A. did not survive for consideration. No substantive question of law was adjudicated; the order is of value only as a record of voluntary withdrawal and court-fee refund.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8835 RSA No. 100263 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF JULY 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.100263 OF 2025 (DEC/POS)

BETWEEN:

SHRI. BABU S/O. SATAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: PRABHU NAGAR – 591 302, TAL: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. BASAVARAJ MATHAPATI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE

REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BELAGAVI – 590 001.

THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER GRAM PANCHAYAT, NITTUR – 591 302. TAL: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI.

Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad

THE CHAIRMAN GRAM PANCHAYAT, NITTUR - 591 302, TAL: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI.

SHRI. MARUTI S/O. PAREPPA CHINNANNAVAR, AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: AGRICUTURE, R/O: PRABHU NAGAR – 591 302, TAL: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI.

SHRI. SHANKAR S/O. PAREPPA CHINNANNAVAR, AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: AGRICUTURE, R/O: PRABHU NAGAR – 591 302, TAL: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI.

SMT. RAYAVVA W/O. SATAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 75 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:8835 RSA No. 100263 of 2025

HC-KAR

R/O: PRABHU NAGAR – 591 302, TAL: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI.

SMT. MALLAVVA W/O. SUBRAO PATIL, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: CHANDANKUD – 416 506, TAL: GADHINGLAJ, DIST: KOLHAPUR, STATE MAHARASTRA.

SHRI. GIRIGOUDA S/O. SATAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER, R/O: HALKARNI, H. B. HIGH SCHOOL – 416 506, TAL: GADHINGLAJ, DIST: KOLHAPUR, STATE MAHARASTRA.

SHRI. DUNDAPPA S/O. SATAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: PVT. EMPLOYEE, R/O: RLS COLLEGE, BELAGAVI – 590 001.

…RESPONDENTS

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL, SET ASIDE BOTH THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 10.01.2024 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KHANAPUR IN RA NO.6/2020 AND THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.01.2020 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KHANAPUR IN OS NO.275/2014 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8835 RSA No. 100263 of 2025

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL)

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a

memo which reads as under:

“The appellant respectfully submits as follows:

1. The above appeal is filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 10.01.2024 passed in R.A. No. 6/2020 by the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Khanapur, confirming the judgment and decree dated 16.01.2020 in O.S. No. 275/2014 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Khanapur.

2. The appellant, upon further legal advice and after careful consideration, desires to withdraw the present Regular Second Appeal.

3. It is also respectfully submitted that the appellant may kindly be granted liberty to seek refund of the court fee paid in the present appeal.

WHEREFORE, the appellant respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to permit the appellant to withdraw the present appeal and grant liberty to the appellant to seek refund of court fee.”

Memo is taken on record. The appeal is

dismissed as withdrawn.

Learned counsel for the appellant seeks for refund of the court fee.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC-D:8835 RSA No. 100263 of 2025

HC-KAR

4. Registry to look into and refund the admissible

court fee in favour of the appellant.

Pending I.A. does not survive for consideration.

Sd/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

SH/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46