Appeal against a decree for specific performance, premised on the alleged rejection of the defendants' counter-claim. Since no decree was drawn on the counter-claim (court fee unpaid) and a separate appeal against the suit decree was already pending, this appeal was held misconceived and dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2026:KHC:2644 RFA No. 2316 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.2316 OF 2025 (SP/DE/IN)
BETWEEN:
SL NOS.1 AND 2 ARE ALL RESIDING AT KUDURU VILLAGE AND HOBLI MAGADI TALUK BENGALURU DISTRICT - 561101
Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BOTH ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER SRI.YOGANAND @ ANAND S/O LATE MANSIDDAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDENT OF DEVARAYAPATTANA ROAD BEHIND APMC YARD BATWADI, KUVEMPUNAGAR TUMKUR - 572 103
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. H MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE)
NC: 2026:KHC:2644 RFA No. 2316 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND:
SRI.SIDDALINGADEVARU S/O LATE SHIVARUDRAIAH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS RESIDING AT SOMPURA VILLAGE SOMPURA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 111
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.RAJESH MAHALE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.JAYARAJ D.S., ADVOCATE)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 1 R/W SEC.96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 02.08.2025 PASSED IN O.S.NO.86/2016 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT MAGADI, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by defendant Nos.2 and 3 on an assumption that their counter claim is rejected, which amounts to a decree.
NC: 2026:KHC:2644 RFA No. 2316 of 2025
HC-KAR
defendants and the order sheet of the Trial Court passed on I.A.No.4, would submit that in the absence of a validly instituted counter-claim, the defendants cannot be permitted to maintain the present appeal on the premise that the counter claim stood rejected. It is contended that technically and legally, no counter-claim came into existence and therefore, no appeal would lie against a non-existent decree.
It is trite that a counter-claim, once properly instituted and upon payment of requisite court fee, assumes the character of an independent suit and the defendants assume the status of a plaintiff insofar as the counterclaim is concerned. However, despite the opportunity granted by the Trial Court and the directions issued while disposing of I.A.No.4, the defendants failed to comply with
NC: 2026:KHC:2644 RFA No. 2316 of 2025
HC-KAR
the requirement of payment of court fee and
consequently, the learned Trial Judge was justified in not adjudicating the declaratory relief sought by way of counter-claim.
NC: 2026:KHC:2644 RFA No. 2316 of 2025
HC-KAR
claim, the defendants cannot maintain an independent appeal on the alleged rejection of such counter-claim. However, if the defendants are aggrieved by the findings recorded on the additional issues, it is always open to them to challenge the same in a properly constituted appeal against the decree including by invoking the enabling jurisdiction under Order XLI Rule 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure, if the circumstances so warrant.
NC: 2026:KHC:2644 RFA No. 2316 of 2025
HC-KAR
Additional Issues Nos.1 and 2 in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed.
Sd/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE
NBM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appeal lies against an alleged rejection of a counter-claim on which no decree was drawn for want of payment of court fee.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Komala
Smt. Sumalatha
Sri. Siddalingadevaru
Sachin Shankar Magadum
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
