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.

Sri K R Narasimhamurthy Vs Sri K R Thimmaiah — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Home
Karnataka HC
2025
Sri K R Narasimhamurthy Vs Sri K R ThimmaiahSri K R Narasimhamurthy v. Sri K R Thimmaiah

Dismissed¶38

Sri K R Narasimhamurthy v. Sri K R Thimmaiah

Karnataka HC2 Jun 2025RSA/119/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru (NC: 2025:KHC:18495), RSA No. 119 of 2021 (INJ), K.R. Narasimhamurthy v. K.R. Thimmaiah and others, decided 02.06.2025 by H.P. Sandesh, J. Second appeal dismissed purely on procedural grounds — non-payment of process fee (PF) for serving notice on respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and lack of diligent prosecution; relevant to arguments on dismissal for non-prosecution, effect of failure to take steps/serve notice on remaining respondents, and diligence required in pursuing appeals under Section 100 CPC. Contains no ruling on the substantive dispute in O.S.No.357/2009 or the first appeal R.A.No.10047/2019, and cites no precedent.

What did the court decide?

The appellant is not pursuing the matter diligently: although the second appeal was filed in 2021, he repeatedly failed to furnish process fee even after emergent notice was ordered in 2022, and only respondent No.1 had appeared.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether any grounds existed to keep the second appeal pending when the appellant, having filed it in 2021, persistently failed to pursue the matter and to furnish process fee (PF) for service of notice on respondent Nos. 2 to 4.

Court's answer

The appellant is not pursuing the matter diligently: although the second appeal was filed in 2021, he repeatedly failed to furnish process fee even after emergent notice was ordered in 2022, and only respondent No.1 had appeared.

Ratio / Principle

Since no grounds were made out to keep the appeal pending when the appellant showed no interest, the regular second appeal is dismissed for non-payment of PF to respondent Nos. 2 to 4.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 CPC — dismissed for non-prosecution. The appeal (filed 2021) challenged the appellate judgment and decree dated 28.01.2020 in R.A.No.10047/2019, which had confirmed the trial court decree dated 25.03.2017 in O.S.No.357/2009. Emergent notice was ordered on 10.08.2022 with directions to secure TCR, but the appellant never furnished process fee (PF) for service of notice on respondent Nos. 2 to 4 across multiple listings from 23.07.2024 to 24.01.2025; only respondent No.1 appeared. Holding that the appellant was 'not pursuing the matter diligently' and that 'no grounds are made out to keep the appeal pending', H.P. Sandesh, J. dismissed the regular second appeal for non-payment of PF to respondent Nos. 2 to 4. No merits question relating to the suit or the first appeal was adjudicated.

A

NC: 2025:KHC:18495 RSA No. 119 of 2021

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF JUNE, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 119 OF 2021 (INJ)

BETWEEN:

SRI. K.R.NARASIMHAMURTHY

S/O LATE RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/AT KANAKENAHALLI VILLAGE KADALAPANAHALLI POST SASALU HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK-561 203.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. KHADRI S.A., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

SRI. K.R. THIMMAIAH S/O LATE RANGAIAH ALIAS ADAVEERANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, R/AT ROJIPURA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK-562103.

SMT. LALITHAMMA W/O LATE K.R. SURESH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,

SRI. RAVI KUMAR S/O LATE K R SURESH AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,

SRI MANOHAR S/O LATE K.R.SURESH AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18495 RSA No. 119 of 2021

HC-KAR

RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 4 ARE R/AT KANAKENAHALLI VILLAGE SASALU HOBLI DODDABALLAPURA TALUK-561203.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. KUMBAR V.F., ADVOCATE FOR R1)

THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.01.2020 PASSED IN R.A.NO.10047/2019 (OLD NO.8/2017) ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, DODDABALLAPURA, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.03.2017 PASSED IN O.S.NO.357/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DODDABALLAPUR.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

ORAL JUDGMENT

This second appeal is filed in 2021. This Court issued emergent notice to the respondents vide order dated 10.08.2022 and the Registry is also directed to secure TCR. This matter was listed before the Court on 23.07.2024 and learned counsel for the appellant was absent. However, this Court granted one week to furnish PF to issue notice to the

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18495 RSA No. 119 of 2021

HC-KAR

respondent and also made it clear that if PF is paid within a week, issue notice to the respondents. The matter was again called on 30.10.2024, none appeared for the appellant and once again, two weeks time was granted and made it clear that if steps are taken, issue notice to the respondents and re-list on 28.11.2024. Inspite of it, learned counsel for the appellant has not furnished PF and on 28.11.2024, at the request of both the parties, ordered to re-list on 05.12.2024 and on 05.12.2024, none appeared for the appellant and four weeks’ time was granted to take steps to respondent Nos.2 to 4 returnable by 23.01.2025. Once again on 24.01.2025, a week’s time was granted to do the needful. The appellant is not furnishing PF, even though emergent notice was ordered in the year 2022 itself and except appearance of respondent No.1, none appeared in the matter for non-furnishing of PF.

Having taken note of the said aspect into consideration, the appellant is not pursuing the matter diligently, inspite of appeal is filed in the year 2021, that too a second appeal. Hence, no grounds are made out to keep the appeal pending, when the appellant is not showing interest.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:18495 RSA No. 119 of 2021

HC-KAR

Accordingly, the regular second appeal is dismissed for

non-payment of PF to respondent Nos.2 to 4.

Sd/(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE

ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether any grounds existed to keep the second appeal pending when the appellant, having filed it in 2021, persistently failed to pursue the matter and to furnish process fee (PF) for service of notice on respondent Nos. 2 to 4.¶33
The court held
The appellant is not pursuing the matter diligently: although the second appeal was filed in 2021, he repeatedly failed to furnish process fee even after emergent notice was ordered in 2022, and only respondent No.1 had appeared.ratio¶33

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Code of Civil ProcedureSection 100¶25

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Judgment and decree dated 28.01.2020 in R.A.No.10047/2019 (Old No.8/2017) on the file of the IV Additional District and Session Judge, Doddaballapura, dismissing the first appeal and confirming the trial court's judgment and decree dated 25.03.2017 in O.S.No.357/2009.¶25
IV Additional District and Session Judge, Doddaballapura · 28.01.2020
Prior proceeding
Trial court: O.S.No.357/2009 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Doddaballapur, judgment and decree dated 25.03.2017.¶25
Prior proceeding
First appeal R.A.No.10047/2019 (Old No.8/2017) before the IV Additional District and Session Judge, Doddaballapura, dismissed by judgment and decree dated 28.01.2020.¶25
Prior proceeding
In the present second appeal (filed 2021), this Court issued emergent notice to the respondents vide order dated 10.08.2022 and directed the Registry to secure the Trial Court Records (TCR).¶29
Prior proceeding
Despite repeated listings and extensions (including 23.07.2024, 30.10.2024, 28.11.2024, 05.12.2024 and 24.01.2025), the appellant never furnished process fee (PF) for service of notice on respondent Nos. 2 to 4; only respondent No.1 appeared.¶32

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
Sri. K.R. Narasimhamurthy¶10
Sri. Khadri S.A.
respondent
Sri. K.R. Thimmaiah¶16
Sri. Kumbar V.F.
respondent
Smt. Lalithamma¶17
respondent
Sri. Ravi Kumar¶18
respondent
Sri Manohar¶19

Coram

AI extract

H.P. Sandeshauthor¶27

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 2 Jun 2025 · June
Registered: 5 Feb 2021
Case no.: RSA/119/2021
CNR: KAHC010324522020
Bench: H.p.sandesh
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: Regular Second Appeal (INJ)

Similar cases

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

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from H.p.sandesh

Sri. Manjanna M.K., Vs the State of Karnataka
2 May 2025
Sri Murali Vs State by Channarayapatna Police
2 May 2025
Mrs N Padmini Vs Superintendent of Police
2 May 2025
Muddagangamma Vs Smt. Anusuyamma
2 Jun 2025
Smt. Nalini Vs Smt. Anitha
2 Jun 2025
Shivalingaswamy Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer
3 Jun 2025

Cite this judgement

Sri K R Narasimhamurthy v. Sri K R Thimmaiah, RSA/119/2021 (KA), decided on 2 June 2025.

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

Statutes1

Code of Civil ProcedureSection 100

View all statutes

Procedural history5

Judgment and decree dated 28.01.2020 in R.A.No.10047/2019 (Old No.8/2017) on the file of the IV Additional District and Session Judge, Doddaballapura, dismissing the first appeal and confirming the trial court's judgment and decree dated 25.03.2017 in O.S.No.357/2009.IV Additional District and Session Judge, Doddaballapura · 28.01.2020
Trial court: O.S.No.357/2009 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Doddaballapur, judgment and decree dated 25.03.2017.
First appeal R.A.No.10047/2019 (Old No.8/2017) before the IV Additional District and Session Judge, Doddaballapura, dismissed by judgment and decree dated 28.01.2020.

View full history

Bench / Coram

H.P. Sandesh

Parties & counsel