##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:6076

RSA No. 100973 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.

REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 100973 OF 2025 (PAR/POS-)

BETWEEN:

SMT. BASAMMA W/O. SIDDAPPA YADAWAD

AGE. 55 YEARS,

OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,

R/O. BEHIND APMC, BADAMI,

TQ. BADAMI,

DIST. BAGALKOT-587201.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. GIRISH YADAWAD, ADVOCATE)

AND:

BASAVARAJ S/O. RAYAPPA YADAWAD

AGE. 68 YEARS,

OCC. AGRICULTURE,

R/O. NIRALAGI,

TQ. BADAMI,

DIST. BAGALKOT-587201.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.J.S.SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

Digitally

signed by

GIRIJA A.

BYAHATTI THIS RSA FILED U/SEC.100 OF CPC, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS

GIRIJA A. Location:

BYAHATTIHIGH

COURT OF

K DA HR AN RA WT AA DKA, APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED

BENCH

29.10.2025 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS

JUDGE, FAST TRACK SPECIAL COURT-1 IN RA NO.04/2025

CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 06.11.2024

PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., BADAMI IN O.S

NO.70/2020, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ARGUMENTS, THIS

DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:6076

RSA No. 100973 of 2025

HC-KAR

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.

ORAL JUDGMENT

This is the appeal filed by the appellant under Section

100 of C.P.C. challenging the judgment and decree dated

29.10.2025 on the file of Additional District and Sessions

Judge, Fast Track Special Court-1, Bagalkot in

R.A.No.4/2025 by confirming the judgment and decree

dated 06.11.2024 passed in O.S.No.70/2020 on the file of

Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Badami.

2. The parties would be referred with their ranks, as

they were before the Trial Court for sake of convenience

and clarity.

3. The plaintiff has filed the suit before Trial Court

praying for partition and separate possession of his share in

the suit schedule properties by metes and bounds.

4. After recording evidence, the suit of plaintiff was

decreed granting ½ share in the suit schedule properties by

metes and bounds to plaintiff. The said judgment was

challenged before First Appellate Court.

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:6076

RSA No. 100973 of 2025

HC-KAR

5. The First Appellate Court has not heard the

arguments of learned counsel for appellant, because even

after giving sufficient opportunity, the appellant did not

advance arguments and hence, only heard the arguments of

learned counsel for respondent and passed the judgment on

merits and dismissed the appeal on merits.

6. The said judgment of First Appellate Court is

under challenge in this appeal.

7. At the time of admitting the appeal, the following

Substantial questions of law are formulated:

i) Whether the First Appellate Court is

justified in passing the judgment on

merits when the learned counsel for the

appellant before the First Appellate Court

has not submitted his arguments on

merits as noted in paragraph No.12 of

the judgment of First Appellate Court?

ii) Whether the judgment and decree of trial

Court and First Appellate Court are

justifiable by only casting burden upon

the defendant instead of casting any

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:6076

RSA No. 100973 of 2025

HC-KAR

initial burden upon plaintiff who

approached the Court ?

8. Heard arguments of both sides.

9. Learned counsel for appellant Sri Girish Yadwad

would submit that the First Appellate Court has passed the

judgment without hearing the arguments of learned counsel

for appellant and dismissed the appeal on merits. Hence,

the said judgment is not maintainable in law. Further the

Trial Court and First Appellate Court have casted burden on

defendant instead of casting initial burden upon plaintiff.

Hence, prayed for allowing the appeal.

10. Learned counsel for respondent Sri J.S.Shetty

would submit that he has no objection to allow the appeal

and remand to First Appellate Court; casting burden upon

defendant is proper because, sale deed in the joint names is

admitted by defendant. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the

appeal.

11. Having heard arguments of both sides, verifying

th