IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO

R.S.A.No.21/2007

BETWEEN:

Sri Gopalappa

Aged about 59 years

S/o. Sri Munidasappa

Resident of Bhaktharahalli

Kasaba Hobli, Hosakote Taluk

Bangalore Rural District - 562114

...Appellant

(By Sri.G.Papireddy, Advocate

Appeared through physical hearing)

AND:

1.

Smt. Muniyamma

Aged about 70 years

W/o. late Sri Narayanappa

Bhaktharahalli Village

Kasaba Hobli

Hosakote Taluk

Bangalore Rural District – 562114

2.

Smt. Saraswathi

Aged about 60 years

W/o. Sri. G.Krishna

No.188/2, Muniswamappa Road

Ulsoor, Bangalore – 560 008

…Respondents

(By Sri.G.R.Laxmipathy Reddy, Advocate for R1

2

Appeared through physical hearing;

V.O.Dt.30.08.2011 Service of notice to R2 is

Held sufficient)

This RSA is filed u/S 100 of CPC., against the

judgment

and

decree

dated:12.9.2006

passed

in

R.A.No.20/2002 on the file of the Presiding Officer, District

and Sessions Judge, FTC-II, Bangalore Rural District and

Bangalore,

dismissing

the

appeal

filed

against

the

judgment

and

decree

dt.8.4.2002

passed

in

O.S.No.226/92 on the file of the II Addl. Civil Judge

(Sr.Dn.), Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore.

This RSA Coming on for hearing this day, the Court

delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

Appeal is directed against the judgment and

decree dated 12.9.2006 passed in R.A.No.20/2002 on

the file of District and Sessions Judge, FTC-II,

Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, wherein the

appeal came to be dismissed by confirming the

judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.226/1992

dated 08.4.2002 by II Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.),

Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore.

3

2.

The appellant herein is one Gopalappa, he

is the plaintiff before the trial court and also the

appellant before the First Appellate Court.

3.

In order to avoid confusion and overlapping

the parties are referred as per their names and

rankings held by them before the trial Court.

4.

The facts of the case have two limbs,

wherein the first set of facts related to sale agreement

dated 17.11.1985, wherein one Narayanappa agreed

to execute the registered sale deed in favour of

defendant No.2 – Saraswathi and second set of fact

related to sale agreement dated 14.03.1991.

5.

The details of the said agreement dated

17.11.1985 are, the schedule property was agreed to

be sold for a cash consideration of Rs.70,000/- and

out of which, the purchaser – Saraswathi paid an

advance amount of Rs.40,000/-, it was agreed by the

4

parties that the purchaser – Saraswathi had to pay

the remaining sale consideration of Rs.30,000/- at the

time of execution of the registered sale deed within

the time limit of three months from the date of

agreement dated 17.11.1985. Meanwhile, the deal

between the parties did not prosper by completion.

Narayanappa – the seller under the agreement died

during the year 1990. It is stated that his wife –

Muniyamma is the only legal heir or survivor of

deceased Narayanappa. As the agreement did not

prosper, Saraswathi - the purchaser of the schedule

property

under

the

agreement

approached

Smt.Muniyamma wife of Narayanappa for return of

advance amount as the former was not able to get

registered the sale deed by paying remaining sale

consideration. Meanwhile, it is stated that Muniyamma

had no money. It was at this juncture, both the

purchaser under the agreement – Smt. Sarswathi and

5

widow of Narayanappa – Smt. Muniyamma had

offered the schedule property to be sold to one

Gopalappa son of Munidasappa who is the plaintiff.

With this background, Gopalappa agreed to purchase

the schedule property for a cash consideration of

Rs.70,000/-

and

paid

an

advance

amount

of

Rs.15,000/-. It is stated that the said amo