A High Court appeal barred by Section 19(1) may be transferred to the competent District Court.

The appellants filed an appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC against the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Chintamani’s order dated 28 April 2025 dismissing their application for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC in O.S. No. 52 of 2016.

The High Court considered whether it could entertain the appeal in light of Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964.

Whether the appeal was maintainable before the High Court under Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964.

If not, whether the matter should be transferred to the competent District Court for adjudication.

The Court relied on Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, as interpreted in the Division Bench decision in Smt. Narayanamma v. The State of Karnataka, W.P. No. 17588 of 2024 c/w W.A. No. 200260 of 2025, dated 8 July 2026; that decision had been affirmed by the Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 025075/2026 on 3 August 2026.

The Court also noted that the appeal had been brought under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC.

The judgment does not set out the detailed statutory interpretation or the precedent’s reasoning.

Applying Section 19(1) and the cited, Supreme Court-affirmed Division Bench decision, the High Court concluded that the appeal was not maintainable before it.

It therefore directed transfer of the case record to the Principal District and Sessions Judge, who could assign the matter to the competent appellate court to proceed from the stage at which it had stopped.

The Court expressly made no determination on the merits.

The Registry was directed to transfer the entire record, including any pending applications, to the concerned Principal District and Sessions Judge for assignment to the competent appellate court.

All rights and contentions were left open, and the parties were directed to appear before the District Judge on 2 November 2026 without awaiting further notice.