Dismissed¶¶36

Sri Appaiah v. Sri Muniseethappa

Karnataka HC23 Jun 2026RSA/1037/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC RSA (Section 100 CPC) dismissed as abated: sole plaintiff-appellant died 07.01.2025; impleadment of his legal representatives (I.A.No.1/2025, filed 25.03.2025) rejected because the decree was a personal decree; appeal against reversal (RA.No.69/2012, 20.04.2021) of the O.S.No.89/2007 permanent-injunction decree (16.03.2012, Hosakote) thereby abated; court reserved liberty to pursue fresh action for alleged interference by the respondent. Keywords: abatement, personal decree, impleadment of legal representatives, injunction, Hosakote, V Srishananda.

What did the court decide?

Since the plaintiff (sole appellant) is no more and the decree obtained by him was a personal decree, the application seeking impleadment of his legal representatives for the purpose of prosecuting the present appeal does not survive for consideration.

Sri Appaiah Vs Sri Muniseethappa — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether I.A.No.1/2025 (filed 25.03.2025) seeking to bring the legal representatives of the deceased sole appellant on record survives for consideration, so as to enable prosecution of the appeal. +1 more

¶¶32

Court's answer

¶¶32

Ratio / Principle

Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2025 filed for bringing the legal representative of the deceased sole appellant on record is rejected.

¶¶35

Key takeaways

Consequent on the rejection of I.A.No.1/2025, the appeal stands dismissed as abated.ratio¶¶36
It is made clear that if any fresh cause of action arises in favour of the proposed legal representatives of the deceased sole appellant with regard to the alleged interference by the respondent, the dismissal of the present appeal shall not come in the way of their pursuing fresh action in accordance with law.obiter¶¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular Second Appeal No. 1037 of 2022 (INJ), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru (Justice V Srishananda, 23 June 2026), under Section 100 CPC against the First Appellate Court's judgment and decree dated 20.04.2021 in RA.No.69/2012 (IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District), which had allowed the defendants' appeal and set aside the permanent-injunction decree dated 16.03.2012 in O.S.No.89/2007 (Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Hosakote). The sole appellant having died on 07.01.2025, his I.A.No.1/2025 of 25.03.2025 seeking impleadment of legal representatives was rejected on the ground that the plaintiff was no more and the decree he had obtained was a personal decree, so the impleadment application did not survive; consequently the appeal stood dismissed as abated. The court reserved that a fresh cause of action regarding alleged interference by the respondent would not be barred by this dismissal, and the proposed legal representatives may pursue fresh action in accordance with law.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:31115 RSA No. 1037 of 2022

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

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

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1037 OF 2022 (INJ)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI APPAIAH S/O KURAPPA AGED 49 YEARS R/AT HASIGALA VILLAGE HOSAKOTE TALUK - 562 114 BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICIT

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. BASAVANNA M D.,ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

SRI MUNISEETHAPPA S/O LT SHAMANNA AGED 54 YEARS R/AT HASIGALA VILLAGE HOSAKOTE TALUK - 562 114 BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT

¶14

…RESPONDENT THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.04.2021 PASSED IN RA.NO.69/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.03.2012 PASSED IN OS.NO.89/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HOSAKOTE.

¶15

¶16

NC: 2026:KHC:31115 RSA No. 1037 of 2022

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

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

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

The sole appellant said to have died on 07.01.2025.

¶22

None appears for the proposed legal representative of deceased sole appellant.

¶23

I.A.No.1/2025 seeking to bring the legal

¶24

representatives of the deceased sole appellant on record has been filed on 25.03.2025.

¶25

Perused the appeal papers.

¶26

The suit in O.S.No.89/2007 was one for permanent injunction, which came to be decreed on 16.03.2012. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the defendants preferred an appeal.

¶27

The First Appellate Court upon re-appreciation of the material on record allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree of injunction passed in O.S.No.89/2007.

¶28

¶29

NC: 2026:KHC:31115 RSA No. 1037 of 2022

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Since the plaintiff is no more and the decree obtained

¶32

by the plaintiff was a personal decree, the application seeking impleadment of the legal representatives for the purpose of prosecuting the present appeal does not survive for consideration.

¶33

Accordingly, the following:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

i) I.A.No.1/2025 filed for bringing the legal representative of deceased sole appellant on record, is rejected.

¶36

ii) Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed as abated.

¶37

It is made clear that if any fresh cause of action arises in favour of the proposed legal representatives of deceased sole appellant with regard to the alleged interference by the respondent, the dismissal of the present appeal shall not come in the way of their pursuing fresh action in accordance with law.

¶38

Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE

¶39

PHM/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

Sri Appaiah v. Sri Muniseethappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Appaiah v. Sri Muniseethappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Lakshmamma Vs Sri Annegowda

Rajashekaraiah Vs Shankarappa

Sri.a.K.Rangappa Vs Mudalagiriyappa

Madappa Vs Smt Shivamma

Mr.M R Ramachandra Vs M R Manjunath

C B Renuka Prasad Vs Smt C B Shivakumari Dead by Her Legal Heirs B v Veerabasaiah