Karnataka High Court
RFA/1048/2017 of M/S UPKAR DEVELOPERS Vs SMT. MANONMANI on 4 June 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:26531-DB RFA No. 1048 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1048 OF 2017 (PAR-) BETWEEN: 1. M/S UPKAR DEVELOPERS A
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1048 OF 2017 (PAR-)
BETWEEN:
1.
M/S UPKAR DEVELOPERS
A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM
REGISTERED UNDER REGISTRAR OF FIRMS
REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.28,
UPKAR TOWERS, 9TH CROSS,
OPP. R.V. ROAD, JAYAANGAR II BLOCK,
BENGLAURU 560 011.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING PARTNER
MR. K.H. KHAN,
S/O LATE N.A. KHAN
(BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP
IS NOT CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT
AT PRESENT IN THIS APPEAL)
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. BHADRINATH R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SMT. MANONMANI
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
W/O JEEVAN
RESIDNG AT NO.79/11,
M.K. JAYA COMPOUND,
M.E.S. COLONY, HUNSUR 571114
MYSORE DISTRICT.
Digitally
signed by
VASANTHA
KUMARY B
K
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
2.
SMT. USHA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
W/O LAWTE PURUSHOTHAMA
C/O PUTTASWAMY,
NO.424, GROUND FLOOR,
17TH MAIN, 2ND CROSS,
K.H.B. COLONY, 5TH BLOCK,
KORAMANGALA
BENGALURU 560 076.
3.
SRI. M.K. ANANDA
AGED 48 YEARS,
S/O LAE M.K. JAYA
4.
SRI. M.K. NANDA
AGED 44 YEARS
S/O LATE M.K. JAYA
R3 & R4 RESIDING AT M.K. JAYA COMPOUNDK, NES COLONY, HUNSUR 571114
MYSORE DISTRICT.
5.
SMT. ASHA
W/O ASHOK AMIN
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
RESIING AT DURGA NIVAS
ROOM NO.5, BLOCK "G" NEAR ITI,
POWAI, MUMBAI 400 076.
6.
SRI. BASAVARAJU
S/O DEVAIAH
RESIDING AT BILIKERE VILLAGE
HUNSUR 571105.
7.
SRI. NAGARAJU
S/O DODDAIAH
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
BANNI STREET
HUNSUR TOWN-571114
HC-KAR
MYSORE DISTRICT.
8.
SRI. DEEPAK
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O M.K. ANANDA
9.
SRI. DHEERESH
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O M.K. ANANDA
10.
SRI. ANISH
AGED 20 YEARS
R8 to R10 ARE
RESIDING AT M.K. JAYA COMPOUND
NES COLONY, HUNSUR-571114
MYSORE DISTRICT.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SUNEEL S.NARAYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; SRI. MALLAPPA S NACHAVAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. B S NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R3, R4, R8, R9
& R10., ADVOCATE;
R5, R6 AND R7 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:15.07.2011
PASSED IN OS.NO.158/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUNSUR., PARTLY DECREEING THE
SUIT FOR PARTITION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
HC-KAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)
The proposed applicant has filed the present appeal along with the application seeking condonation of delay of 3882 days, as well as the application seeking leave of this Court to file an appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 15.07.2011 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hunsur in Original Suit No.158/2005 filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 seeking partition of the suit schedule property. During the pendency of this suit, the defendant Nos.4 and 5 namely, Basavaraju and Nagaraju, disposed of the 'A' schedule property in favour of one Satya without leave of this Court. No application was filed before this Court when the lis was pending seeking alienation of 'A' schedule property in favour of Satya, however, the applicant has purchased the 'A' schedule property from Satya.
2. We are of the view that the application cannot be maintained and that there is no sufficient reason to condone such an enormous delay of 3882 days. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal. Resultantly, the proposed application is also dismissed. However, the amount deposited by the appellant,
HC-KAR
before this Court in pursuance of the interim order dated 23.09.2025, shall be refunded along with interest accrued thereon. The applicant may work out legal remedies against Satya or any other person in accordance with law. However, the applicant cannot be allowed to challenge the judgment and decree in question.
Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE
Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE
RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17