Dismissed¶49

Karnataka Housing Board v. Sri Basappa Since Deceased Rep by His Lrs

Karnataka HC16 Apr 2026RSA/688/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of wrongly filed appeal; Regular Second Appeal vs Miscellaneous Second Appeal; memo for withdrawal; refund of court fees; Karnataka Court-Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1958; Section 100 CPC; Karnataka Housing Board v. LRs of Late Sri Basappa; R.A.No.59/2026; O.S.No.938/2010; IA.No.V; order dated 09.03.2026; Bengaluru Rural District; Pradeep Singh Yerur J.; dismissal as withdrawn with liberty.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the appellant to file an appropriate appeal (Miscellaneous Second Appeal) before the appropriate forum; Registry directed to refund the entire court fee per the Karnataka Court-Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1958, within two weeks of the appellant furnishing bank details. ¶49

Karnataka Housing Board Vs Sri Basappa Since Deceased Rep by His Lrs — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶49

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant, having by oversight filed a Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 CPC instead of a Miscellaneous Second Appeal, may withdraw the appeal with liberty to file the appropriate appeal before the appropriate forum and obtain refund of the court fee paid.

¶44

Ratio / Principle

The memo filed by learned counsel for the appellant was placed on record and the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty reserved to the appellant to file an appropriate appeal before the appropriate forum.

¶49

Key takeaways

In view of the withdrawal of the appeal, the Registry was directed to refund the entire court fee as per the Karnataka Court-Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1958, upon the appellant furnishing the relevant bank details.ratio¶50
The refund of the court fee amount was to be made by the Registry within a period of two weeks from the date of the appellant furnishing the necessary bank details.ratio¶51

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular Second Appeal (S.100 CPC), RSA No.688 of 2026 (SP): Karnataka Housing Board, appellant, through a memo conceded that it had by oversight filed this Regular Second Appeal instead of a Miscellaneous Second Appeal challenging the judgment dated 02.04.2026 in R.A.No.59/2026 (Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District), which had restored the suit in O.S.No.938/2010 (I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District) against the order of 09.03.2026 passed on IA.No.V. The High Court placed the memo on record, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn with liberty to file an appropriate appeal before the appropriate forum, and directed the Registry to refund the entire court fee as per the Karnataka Court-Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1958, within two weeks of the appellant furnishing bank details. Oral judgment by Pradeep Singh Yerur, J., dated 16 April 2026. No substantive adjudication on merits; of limited citation value except for procedure on withdrawal and fee refund.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:20833 RSA No. 688 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 688 OF 2026 (SP)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD KHB COMPLEX

¶9

CAUVERY BHAVAN

¶10

K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009 REPRESENTED BY ITS

¶11

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

¶12

… APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI VINAYA H., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

SRI BASAPPA

¶16

SINCE DECEASED, REP. BY HIS LRS.

¶17

SMT.HEMAVATHI W/O.LATE BASAPPA

¶18

AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS

¶19

Digitally signed by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶20

SRI SUNIL KUMAR S/O.LATE BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

¶21

SMT.SHASHIKALA D/O.LATE BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS

¶22

SMT.GIRIJAMBA D/O.LATE BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

¶23

SMT.NEELA D/O.LATE BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

¶24

¶25

NC: 2026:KHC:20833 RSA No. 688 of 2026

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

R-1 TO R-5 ARE R/AT HAMPAPURA VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT

¶28

SRI CHENNIGAPPA S/O.SRI PUTTABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/AT HAMPAPURA VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-560 060

¶29

SRI H.P.LAKSHMANA S/O.LATE PUTTABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT HAMPAPURA VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK-560 060

¶30

M/S.MEGACITY (BENGALURU) DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS LTD. NO.1, "CHANDRA LOK" 5^TH CROSS, GANDHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 009 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

¶31

SRI C.P.YOGEESHWARA S/O.SRI PUTTAMADEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT CHEKKERE VILLAGE MALUR HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 159

¶32

…RESPONDENTS

¶33

(BY SRI NAGARAJ SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-8 & R-9)

¶34

THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 02.04.2026 PASSED IN R.A.NO.59/2026 BY THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,

¶35

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:20833 RSA No. 688 of 2026

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU AND CONSEQUENTLY, RESTORE THE ORDER DATED 09.03.2026 PASSED ON IA.NO.V IN O.S.NO.938/2010 BY I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU AND ETC.

¶39

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

¶40

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶41

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶42

Learned counsel for appellant files a memo, which

¶43

reads as under:

¶44

"In view of the above matter, the Appellant had filed the instant Appeal challenging the Judgment passed by the Hon'ble First Appellate Court in RA. No. 59/2026, restoring the suit in OS No.938/2010, on the file of 1^st Addl. Senior Civil Judge at Bengaluru rural District, Bengaluru. It is submitted that, the Appellant by oversight filed the instant Appeal instead of filing of Miscellaneous Second Appeal before this Hon'ble Court. Hence that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to permit the Appellant to withdraw the instant Appeal with liberty to file a Miscellaneous Second Appeal before this Hon'ble Court. And further that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the registry to refund

¶45

¶46

NC: 2026:KHC:20833 RSA No. 688 of 2026

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

the Court fees paid by the Appellant in the instant Appeal. In the interest of justice and equity."

¶49

Placing the said memo on record, this appeal is dismissed as withdrawn, reserving liberty to the appellant to file appropriate appeal before the appropriate forum.

¶50

In view of withdrawal of the appeal, Registry is directed to refund the entire Court fee as per the Karnataka Court-Fee and Suits Valuation Act, 1958, upon the appellant furnishing relevant Bank details.

¶51

Registry to refund the amount to the appellant within a period of two weeks from the date of appellant furnishing necessary Bank details.

¶52

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶53

¶54

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16

Karnataka Housing Board v. Sri Basappa Since Deceased Rep by His Lrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Housing Board v. Sri Basappa Since Deceased Rep by His Lrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. M. Lakshmi Vs Sri.N. Krishnachari

Smt Hindubai Vs State by

Sri N Krishnachari Vs Sri M S Raghuveer

Shankarshetti Vs State of Karnataka

Shivananda Vs State of Karnataka

Sri H P Lakshmana Vs Sri Basappa Since Deceased Rep by His Lrs