IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 284 OF 2023 (IO)

BETWEEN:

SRI. B.N. SHIVARAM S/O LATE B. NANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT BUDENAHALLI VILLAGE KODIGENAHALLI HOBLI MADHUGIRI TALUK-572 132.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. RONALD, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VIVEK .S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. KARNATAKA BANK HEAD OFFICE SITUATED Digitally signed IN MANGALORE by NANDINI R ESTABLISHED BRANCH OFFICE Location: HIGH COURT OF AT MADHUGIRI KARNATAKA HIGH SCHOOL ROAD IN MADHUGIRI TOWN-572 132.

REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER BRANCH MANAGER

2. SMT. B.N. LAKSHMIDEVI @ JAYASHRI W/O M.S. LOKESH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT D. NO. 1737/14 EAST END MAIN ROAD

9^TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU-560 069.

3. SMT. B.N. PUTTAMA W/O THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDENT OF 8^TH B CROSS

8^TH MAIN ROAD, SHIVANAHALLI BENGALURU-560 010.

4. SMT. LALITHAMMA W/O C. KANTHARAJU AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO. 5, 11-A CROSS PRASHANTHNAGAR BENGALURU-560 071.

5. SMT. B.N. SHAKUNTHALAMMA W/O JAYANNA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT SRI NILATYA VINAYAKANAGAR, GAUBIDANURU CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-561 208.

6. SMT. B.N. VIJAYALAKSHMI W/O S.R. CHANDRAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT NO. 313, OUT HOUSE

7^TH MAIN ROAD, VIJAYANAGAR BENGALURU-560 040.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GANESH .A, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

SRI. M.S. RAJENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R6)

THIS CRP IS FILED U/S. 115 OF CPC AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25.08.2022 PASSED IN MA NO. 5009/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMAKURU SITTING AT MADHUGIRI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri.Ronald for Sri.Vivek S., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Ganesh A., learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 6.

There is a delay of 133 days in filing the revision petition. Accepting the reasons assigned in the affidavit, delay is condoned.

2. By consent of the parties the matter is taken up for final disposal. The defendant in OS.No.67/1986 is the revision petitioner challenging the order passed by the First Appellate Court namely IV Additional District and Session Judge, Tumakuru sitting at Madhugiri in MA.No.5009/2019 in this revision petition.

3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present revision petition are as under:

3.1) A suit in OS.No.67/1986 came to be filed by the Karnataka Bank, which is respondent No.1 against Sri.B.Nanjegowda, Sri.B.N.Narasimhamurthy and Sri.P.N.Nagappa for the following reliefs:

"Wherefore, plaintiff prays for a Judgment and Decree against the defendants for Rs.1,82,546-05p together with costs and current interest at Rs.21.50% per annum with quarterly compounded rests from 15-11-1986 till the date of realization from the defendants with such other reliefs as the Court deems fit to grant to the plaintiff in the circumstances of the case".

3.2) Said suit came to be decreed and for executing the said decree, an Execution Case No.39/1990 for recovery of sum of Rs.3,04,617.65/-.

3.3) The revision petitioner being the son of defendant No.1-B.N.Nanjagowda, after his death, one of the children of B.N.Nanjagowda filed a miscellaneous petition in Miscellaneous No.6/2003 on the file of Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Madhugiri with a prayer to set aside the decree passed against B.N.Nanjagowda and others. An application was also filed by him vide IA.No.16 under Article 21 Rule 90 objecting for the execution of the decree. Miscellaneous petition filed under Section 47 of the CPC seeking the prayer that order dated 17.08.2002 in Execution Case No.39/1990 needs to be set aside. Said miscellaneous petition on merits came to be dismissed.

3.4) Against the said miscellaneous case, said order passed in Miscellaneous No.6/2003, an appeal came to be filed in MA.No.5009/2019 under Order XLIII Rule 1 of CPC challenging the validity of the said order. There was a delay in f