Allowed¶88

Smt Leelavathi v. Sri B T Krishnegowda

Karnataka HC23 Feb 2026RFA/1055/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: res judicata; rejection of plaint; Order VII Rule 11 CPC; Section 96 CPC; Regular First Appeal (PAR); partition and separate possession; preliminary issue; O.S.No.82/2019; Senior Civil Judge & JMFC Arakalagud; RFA No. 1055 of 2021; NC: 2026:KHC:11157-DB; High Court of Karnataka; appeal allowed; plaint-rejection order set aside; IA.No.VI rejected; suit remitted for trial with res judicata as preliminary issue.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; order dated 01.09.2021 on IA.No.VI in O.S.No.82/2019 set aside; IA.No.VI rejected; trial Court to frame res judicata as a preliminary issue and consider the suit on merits with opportunity to all parties; parties to appear before the trial Court on 08.04.2026; trial Court to dispose of the 2019 suit as expeditiously as possible; pending applications, if any, disposed of. ¶88

Smt Leelavathi Vs Sri B T Krishnegowda — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶88

Issue for consideration

Whether the plaint in O.S.No.82/2019 ought to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on the ground that an earlier suit between the same parties stood adjudicated (res judicata). +1 more

¶74

Court's answer

Appeal allowed; the order dated 01.09.2021 passed on IA.No.VI in O.S.No.82/2019 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Arakalagud is set aside and consequently IA.No.VI (rejection of plaint) is rejected.

¶89

Ratio / Principle

The trial Court is directed to consider the suit on merits by framing the issue of res judicata as a preliminary issue and to provide an opportunity to all the parties to the suit.

¶90

Key takeaways

This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.obiter¶98

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Plaintiff's Regular First Appeal under S.96 CPC against the order dated 01.09.2021 of the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Arakalagud allowing IA.No.VI (Order VII Rule 11 CPC) and rejecting her plaint in partition suit O.S.No.82/2019 on the ground of res judicata. The contesting defendants who had moved the rejection application conceded that res judicata should instead be tried as a preliminary issue. The Division Bench (Anu Sivaraman and Vijaykumar A. Patil JJ.; judgment per Vijaykumar A. Patil J.), without going into merits, allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, rejected IA.No.VI, and directed the trial Court to frame res judicata as a preliminary issue, afford all parties an opportunity, and dispose of the year-2019 suit expeditiously; parties to appear before the trial Court on 08.04.2026. The Court expressly recorded that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:11157-DB RFA No. 1055 of 2021

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1055 OF 2021 (PAR)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. LEELAVATHI, D/O LATE KALE GOWDA, W/O LATE CHANDRASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT BASAVANAHALLI VILLAGE, RAMANATHPURA HOBLI, ARKALAGUD TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 102.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SMT. KAVYASHREE K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI T SESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM

¶14

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

SRI B T KRISHNEGOWDA, S/O LATE B.T.THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS.

¶16

1(a) RADHAMANI, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, W/O B.T KRISHNEGOWDA, BASVANAHALLI VILLAGE, ARAKALGUDU TALUK, RAMNATHPURA HOBLI, HASSAN DISTRICT.

¶17

1(b) ASHA JYOTHI BASAVANAHALLI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,

¶18

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:11157-DB RFA No. 1055 of 2021

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

D/O B.T KRISHNEGOWDA,

¶22

13525, VICTORY BOULEVARD APARTMENT, VAN NUYS, SAN FRANCISCO, CA-91401, USA.

¶23

1(c) USHA B.K, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,

¶24

W/O ABHISHEK ASHOK KUMAR NARASIMHAIAH, DOOR NO. 407, 4^TH FLOOR, 4^TH CROSS, MANITO COMMANDERS MARVEL APARTMENT, DUO MARVEL LAYOUT, ANANTPURA GATE, BANGALORE-560 064.

¶25

1(d) SRINIVAS B.K, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, S/O LATE B.T. KRISHNEGOWDA, #MIG 252, 6^TH B MAIN ROAD, B SECTOR, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN, BANGALORE-560 064.

¶26

SRI B.T.GOVINDEGOWDA, S/O LATE B.T.THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS.

¶27

SMT. PADMAMMA @ PADMA, D/O LATE B.T.THIMMEGOWDA, W/O LATE N.S.SOMANNA @ SOMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS.

¶28

RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 3 ARE R/AT HOLE BEEDI, 'RAGHU NILAYA', KUSHALNAGARA POST, SOMWARPETE TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 236.

¶29

SMT. SHRIMATHI, W/O LATE PARBHAKARA, D/O LATE B.T.THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

¶30

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:11157-DB RFA No. 1055 of 2021

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

SMT. ARUNDHATHI @ INDUMATHI B P, D/O LATE PRABHAKARA, AGED MAJOR.

¶33

RESPONDENT NOS. 4 AND 5 ARE R/AT BASAVANAHALLI VILLAGE, RAMANATHAPURA HOBLI, ARAKALAGUD TALUK HAASAN DISTRICT-573 102.

¶34

SRI DEVARAJU K P, S/O LATE K.P.PUTTARAJU AND LATE KAMALA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.454, 1^ST CROSS, 4^TH MAIN, MARUTHI TEMPLE ROAD, KUVEMPU NAGAR, MYSURU-570 023.

¶35

SRI MAHESHA K P, S/O LATE K.P.PUTTARAJU AND LATE KAMALA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.454, 1^ST CROSS, 5^TH MAIN, MARUTHI TEMPLE ROAD, KUVEMPU NAGAR, MYSURU-570 023.

¶36

PRESENTLY R/AT FLAT NO.403, MANASA MAYURA APARTMENT, 165-166/1, 2^ND MAIN, 5^TH CROSS, YADAVAGIRI, MYSORE-570 020.

¶37

SMT. SUNITHA K.V., D/O LATE VENKATESHA AND LATE KAMAKSHI, W/O SRI PRAKASHA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.293, 8^TH MAIN, 'B' BLOCK, VIJAYANAGARA, 3^RD STAGE, MYSURU-570 017.

¶38

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:11157-DB RFA No. 1055 of 2021

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

SMT. VINUTHA K.V., D/O LATE VENKATESHA AND LATE KAMAKSHI, W/O JAYARAJ, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.533, 14^TH MAIN, 'B' BLOCK, VIJAYANAGARA, 3^RD STAGE, MYSURU-570 017.

¶41

SMT. KAVITHA K.V., D/O LATE VENKATESHA AND LATE KAMAKSHI, W/O GURURAJ, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.340, 17^TH MAIN, 'B' BLOCK, VIJAYANAGARA, 3^RD STAGE, MYSURU-570 017.

¶42

SRI MANJUNATHA K.V., D/O LATE VENKATESHA AND LATE KAMAKSHI, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.533, 14^TH MAIN, B BLOCK, VIJAYANAGARA, 3^RD STAGE, MYSURU-570 017.

¶43

SMT. PREMA B.K, D/O LATE B.T.KALEGOWDA, W/O RAMACHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT SIDDAPURA VILLAGE, HEBBAL HOBLI, K.R.NAGARA TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT-571 602.

¶44

SMT. JAYALAKSHMI @ SAKAMMA B.K., W/O BOREGOWDA, D/O B.T.KALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT ATTIGUPE VILLAGE, BOREGOWDANA KOPPAL GAVADAGERE HOBLI,

¶45

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:11157-DB RFA No. 1055 of 2021

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

HUNSUR TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571 105.

¶48

SMT. VAIJAYANTHI B.K, W/O PUTTARAJEGOWDA, D/O LATE B.T.KALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT ATTIGUPE VILLAGE, BOREGOWDANAKOPAL, GAVADAGERE HOBLI, HUNSUR TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571 105.

¶49

SMT. MANI B.K, W/O SOMEGOWDA, D/O LATE B.T.KALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT 2/188, VINAYAKA BADAVANE, WARD NO.II, K.R.NAGARA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571 602.

¶50

SMT. NETHRAVATHI B.K, W/O LATE RAMESHA, D/O LATE B.T.KALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT 2/188, VINAYAKA BADAVANE, WARD NO.II, K.R.NAGARA TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT-571 602.

¶51

SRI KUMARA, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, MAJOR, TENANT RUNNING A PROVISION STORE UNDER NAME AND STYLE "HARISH PROVISION STORES" AT GROUND FLOOR, D.NO.641, KERALAPURA VILLAGE, RAMANATHAPURA HOBLI, GANDHI CIRCLE, ARAKALAGUD TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 102.

¶52

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:11157-DB RFA No. 1055 of 2021

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

RAMESHA,

¶55

FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, MAJOR, TENANT RUNNING BAKERY, UNDER NAME AND STYLE "SLR BAKERY AND SWEETS" AT GROUND FLOOR, D NO.641, KERALAPURA VILLAGE, RAMANATHAPURA HOBLI, GANDHI CIRCLE, ARAKALAGUD TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 102.

¶56

MOOLARAM, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, MAJOR, TENANT RUNNING FANCY STORES, UNDER NAME AND STYLE "ANKUR FANCY AND GIFT STORES" AT GORUND FLOOR, D NO.641, KERALAPURA VILLAGE, RAMANATHAPURA HOBLI, GANDHI CIRCLE, ARAKALAGUD TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 102.

¶57

MAHESH, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, MAJOR, TENANT RUNNING PHOTO STUDIO, UNDER NAME AND STYLE "SHAILI STUDIO AND VIDEO" ON FIRST FLOOR, D NO.641, KERALAPURA VILLAGE, RAMANATHAPURA HOBLI, GANDHI CIRCLE, ARAKALAGUD TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 102.

¶58

GEETHA AND SHRIDHARA, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, MAJORS, TENANTS RUNNING BEAUTY PARLOUR, UNDER NAME AND STYLE "SINCHANA BEAUTY PARLOUR" ON FIRST FLOOR, D NO.641, KERALAPURA VILLAGE, RAMANATHAPURA HOBLI, GANDHI CIRCLE, ARAKALAGUD TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 102.

¶59

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:11157-DB RFA No. 1055 of 2021

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

RAVI, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, MAJOR, TENANT RUNNING TAILORING SHOP, WITHOUT NAME BOARDS IN MIDDLE SHOP PREMISES OF FIRST FLOOR, D NO.641, KERALAPURA VILLAGE, RAMANATHAPURA HOBLI, GANDHI CIRCLE, ARAKALAGUD TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 102.

¶62

…RESPONDENTS

¶63

(BY SRI A RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 (a to d) TO R-3, R-17 TO R-22; SRI M C JAYAKIRTHI, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 & R-5; SRI H.K REVANASIDDAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R-8 TO T-16; R-6 & R-7 ARE SERVED)

¶64

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 96 OF CPC., 1908 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 01.09.2021 PASSED ON IA.NO. VI IN OS.NO.82/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., ARAKALAGUD, ALLOWING THE IA.NO.VI FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11 OF CPC., FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT.

¶65

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

¶66

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶67

¶68

NC: 2026:KHC:11157-DB RFA No. 1055 of 2021

¶69

HC-KAR

¶70

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶71

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)

¶72

This appeal is filed by the appellant-plaintiff

¶73

challenging the order dated 01.09.2021 passed on IA.No.VI in O.S.No.82/2019 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Arakalagud (for short, 'the trial Court' ).

¶74

Smt.Kavyashree K., learned counsel for Sri.T.Seshagiri Rao, learned counsel for the appellant submits that defendant Nos.1 to 4 filed an application for rejection of plaint on the ground that the earlier suit between the same parties was adjudicated. It is submitted that the said application was allowed, plaint was ordered to be rejected.

¶75

Per contra, Sri.A.Ravi Shankar, learned counsel

¶76

for respondent Nos.1 to 3, 17 to 22 fairly submits that the issue with regard to res judicata is required to be considered as a preliminary issue by the trial Court and he concedes the legal position and further submits that the matter may be remitted back to the trial Court to consider

¶77

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:11157-DB RFA No. 1055 of 2021

¶78

HC-KAR

¶79

the issue of res judicata as a preliminary issue by disposing of this appeal.

¶80

Sri.M.C.Jayakirthi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.4 & 5 supports the aforesaid submission of Sri.A.Ravi Shankar, learned counsel and submits that they would co-operate with the trial Court for deciding the issue on merits.

¶81

We have heard the arguments on both sides

¶82

and perused the material available on record.

¶83

It is to be noticed that the appellant filed a suit in O.S.No.82/2019 for the relief of partition and separate possession; in the said suit, defendant Nos.1 to 4 filed an application - IA No.VI under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC seeking rejection of plaint on the ground of res judicata . Various contentions have been advanced by the parties, however, it is to be noticed that contesting respondents i.e., defendant Nos.1 to 4 in the suit, who filed an application, fairly conceded that the issue of res judicata is

¶84

10 - NC: 2026:KHC:11157-DB RFA No. 1055 of 2021

¶85

HC-KAR

¶86

required to be treated by the trial Court as a preliminary issue. In view of the said specific submission, without going into the merits of the case, we propose to allow the appeal. Hence, the following:

¶87

ORDER

¶88

i. Appeal is allowed .

¶89

ii. The order dated 01.09.2021 passed on IA.No.VI in O.S.No.82/2019 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Arakalagud, is hereby set aside. Consequently, IA.No.VI is rejected.

¶90

iii. The trial Court is directed to consider the suit on merits by framing the issue of res judicata as a preliminary issue and provide an opportunity to all the parties to the suit.

¶91