An Order XLIII Rule 1(r) appeal is not maintainable before the High Court under Section 19(1).

The appellant filed an appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC challenging the order dated 5 August 2019 on I.A. No. III in O.S. No. 36/2018, passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Bantwal.

The High Court considered the appeal’s maintainability and, relying on Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964 and a cited Division Bench judgment, concluded that the appeal was not maintainable before it

Whether the appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC was maintainable before the High Court in view of Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964

Whether the matter should be transferred to the competent District Court for adjudication from the stage at which it stood

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

The judgment identifies these authorities as the basis for holding that this appeal was not maintainable before the High Court.

Applying Section 19(1) and the cited Narayanamma decision, the Court held that the appeal belonged before the competent District Court rather than the High Court.

It therefore directed transfer of the record, including any pending applications, so that the matter could proceed before the appropriate appellate court from the stage at which it had stopped.

The Court expressly left the merits and parties’ contentions open.

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

No view was expressed on the merits.

The parties were directed to appear before the District Judge on 29 October 2026 without awaiting further notice.