Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
H.P.SANDESH
H.R. Ravichandra, S/o Late Rajashekar Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Shanthamma, D/o Late B.N. Srinivasa Since Deceased – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court heard matter for scheduling hearings. (Para 1) |
| 2. claim of fraud and error in previous judgments. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. citing precedents on delay in filing appeals. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. counterarguments on fraud and notice service. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. analysis of factual background and evidence presented. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. appellant's fraud and indolence dismissed with costs. (Para 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT :
H.P.SANDESH, J.
1. This matter was listed for admission on 23.10.2025 and this Court heard the matter for sometime and the learned counsel for the appellant sought time going to discuss the matter with his client and counsel for the respondent also submits that issue can be sorted out by negotiation and hence, this Court adjourned the matter to 25.10.2025, and the counsel for the caveator/respondent No.1 and 2 made the submission on 25.10.2025 that the learned counsel for the appellant's brother suffered heart attack and admitted to hospital and hence, this Court adjourned the matter to 07.11.2025 and on 07.11.2025, both counsel for respective parties made the submission that there is an element of settlement in the matter and this Court made it clear that i
Delay in filing appeal must be satisfactorily explained, particularly in fraud cases, to warrant consideration by the court, adhering to the clean hands principle for relief.
Point of law: It is well settled principle of law that any judgment or order obtained by fraud, its validity can be challenged in any proceeding. Before three centuries, Chief Justice Edward Coke pro....
Negligence in pursuing legal rights disqualifies parties from condoning lengthy delays in appeals, proving insufficient cause under procedural law.
The court emphasized that mere reliance on counsel does not justify inordinate delay in filing an appeal; sufficient cause must be shown by the appellant.
The Trial Court's decision in favor of the plaintiffs/respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and against the appellant without ensuring notice to the appellant and/or his counsel had been effected was in violation ....
The court emphasized the importance of establishing joint family property and the need to satisfactorily explain inordinate delay in filing an appeal, as per Sec. 96 of CPC and Sec. 51 of the Limitat....
The delay in filing an appeal should be condoned in the interest of justice, where there is no gross negligence or deliberate inaction by the appellant. The expression 'sufficient cause' in Section 5....
If summons issued on the correct address have not been returned, the presumption is that the summons has been received by the addressee.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
