Shri Nanjundappa Vs Shri M Muniswamy — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Shri Nanjundappa Vs Shri M Muniswamy — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the time/adjournment sought by the appellants' counsel — on the ground that Appellant No.1 died on 4.12.2023 and his legal representatives were to be brought on record — should be granted, notwithstanding that Registry objections on the NOC vakalath remained unrectified. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court declined to grant the adjournment sought by the appellants' counsel, observing that the Registry objections had not been rectified despite repeated listings since 2021, that the appellants appeared not interested in the matter, and that there was no good ground for adjournment.

Ratio / Principle

Consequently, the Miscellaneous First Appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

Key takeaways

In view of the disposal of the appeal, the pending interlocutory applications would not survive for consideration and pale into insignificance.ratio¶49

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MFA No. 6135 of 2021 (CPC), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur), oral judgment dated 18.06.2026. Appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) read with Section 151 of CPC against the order dated 24.08.2021 of the Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Anekal in O.S.No.378/2020 rejecting IA No.2 filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC. On the hearing date, learned counsel sought time on the ground that Appellant No.1 died on 4.12.2023 and his legal representatives were yet to be brought on record; however, the objections raised by the Registry on the NOC vakalath of Sri B.T. Venkatesh stood unrectified despite repeated listings (notice to Respondent Nos.1 to 9 had been held sufficient on 23.08.2022). Finding no good ground to grant adjournment and that the appellants appeared not interested in the matter, the Court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution; in view of the disposal, the pending interlocutory applications were held not to survive and to pale into insignificance.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30168 MFA No. 6135 of 2021

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6135 OF 2021 (CPC)

BETWEEN:

SHRI NANJUNDAPPA S/O. LATE. MUNISAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

SHRI. SUBBARAYAPPA S/O. LATE. MUNISAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS

SHRI. GOPALAPPA S/O. LATE. MUNISAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

SHRI. NAGARAJ @ NAGESH S/O. LATE. MUNISWAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

ALL ARE R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, HUSKUR POST, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT 560 097

…APPELLANTS

(BY SRI RAVIKUMAR .N FOR SRI. B.T.VENKATESH.,ADVOCATE)

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30168 MFA No. 6135 of 2021

HC-KAR

AND:

SHRI M .MUNISWAMY S/O.LATE SHRI. C MUNIYAPPA, SINCE DECEASED BY LRS

SMT.RAJESHWARI, D/O. LATE. SHRI. M MUNISWAMY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

SMT.KALAVATHY D/O.LATE. SHRI. M MUNISWAMY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS

BOTH ARE R/AT NO.1, MUNISWAMY GOWDA GARDEN, NEELASANDRA VILLAGE, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU 560 097

SHRI. M THAYAPPA S/O. LATE. SHRI. C MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

SHRI. M RAJANNA S/O. LATE. SHRI. C.MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS

SMT. RENUKA W/O. SHRI. M THAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS

SMT.RASHMI D/O. SHRI. M THAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

SMT. MADHU D/O. SHRI. M THAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:30168 MFA No. 6135 of 2021

HC-KAR

SHRI. PRAVEEN S/O. SHRI. M THAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS

SHRI. PRADEEP S/O. SHRI. M THAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

RESPONDENTS NO. 3 TO 9 ARE R/AT NO.1, MUNISWAMY GOWDA GARDEN, NEELASANDRA VILLAGE, BENGALURU 560 041

…RESPONDENTS

(NOTICE TO R-1 TO R-9 IS HELD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER DATED 23.08.2022)

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER - 43 RULE 1(r) R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC, TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24.08.2021 PASSED BY LEARNED ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, ANEKAL, IN O.S.NO.378/2020 REJECTING IA NO.2 FILED U/O.39 RULE 1 AND 2 R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

ORAL JUDGMENT

Learned counsel - Sri Ravi Kumar .N appearing on behalf of appellants seeks time on the ground that appellant No.1 died on 4.12.2023 and legal representatives of Appellant no. 1 are to be brought on record.

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30168 MFA No. 6135 of 2021

HC-KAR

On perusal of the order sheet, it is seen that the matter has been listed time and again. When the matter came up before the Court on 23.8.2022, notice to Respondent Nos.1 to 9 was held sufficient. Again, when the matter came up before the Court on 12.6.2026, there was no representation on behalf of appellants. However, this Court granted time to rectify the objections raised by the Registry on the NOC vakalath filed by learned counsel - Sri B.T. Venkatesh and if the same are not rectified, directed to list the matter for 'dismissal' on 18.6.2026. Accordingly, the matter is listed today.

Despite the same, objections raised by the Registry have not been rectified till today. The matter is of the year 2021. We are in the month of June-2026. It appears that the appellants are not interested in the matter. I do not find any good ground to grant adjournment as sought by the counsel for the appellants.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non-

prosecution.

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30168 MFA No. 6135 of 2021

HC-KAR

In view of disposal of the appeal, pending interlocutory applications would not survive for

consideration and the same pale into insignificance.

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

GSS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49