Karnataka High CourtCivil Procedure and EvidenceCivil Law

Karnataka HC Transfers 73-Year-Old Woman’s Appeal Against Rejection of Plea to Set Aside Decree to District Court under Civil Courts Act

MRS CYRILLA MATILDA PEREIRAv.STANY PINTO

Karnataka HC Transfers 73-Year-Old Woman’s Appeal Against Rejection of Plea to Set Aside Decree to District Court under Civil Courts Act. MRS CYRILLA MATILDA PEREIRA vs STANY PINTO. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

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

The court held

The Court held that the appeal was not maintainable before it and disposed of it for statistical purposes

It also directed

It directed the Registry to transfer the full record, including any pending applications, to the concerned Principal District and Sessions Judge for assignment to the competent appellate court; it made no observations on the merits and left all contentions open

The matter was listed before the District Court on 30 November 2026

01Facts

The appellant filed an appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(d) CPC challenging the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mangaluru’s order dated 7 April 2025 dismissing her petition under Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 CPC

p. 6

The High Court considered whether it could entertain the appeal and, finding it not maintainable before it, directed transfer of the case record to the District Court

pp. 7–8

02Issues

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

p. 7

ii.2. Whether the matter should be transferred to the competent District Court for adjudication

pp. 7–8

03Law Applied

The Court relied on Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964

p. 7

the Division Bench decision in Smt. Narayanamma v. State of Karnataka, W.P. No. 17588 of 2024 c/w W.A. No. 200260 of 2025, dated 8 July 2026, which had been affirmed by the Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 025075/2026 on 3 August 2026

p. 7

Applying these authorities, the Court held that the appeal was not maintainable before the High Court

p. 7

Provisions in the judgment · 2 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Section 151

KARNATAKA CIVIL COURTS ACT, 1964 Section 19

04Reasoning

The Court applied Section 19(1) and the cited, Supreme Court-affirmed precedent to conclude that this appeal lay outside its jurisdiction

p. 7

Rather than determine the merits, it directed transfer of the record to the Principal District and Sessions Judge for assignment to the competent appellate court, preserving the parties’ rights and contentions

pp. 7–8

05Holding

The Court held that the appeal was not maintainable before it and disposed of it for statistical purposes

pp. 7–8

It directed the Registry to transfer the full record, including any pending applications, to the concerned Principal District and Sessions Judge for assignment to the competent appellate court; it made no observations on the merits and left all contentions open

p. 8

The matter was listed before the District Court on 30 November 2026

p. 8
Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

MRS CYRILLA MATILDA PEREIRAvsSTANY PINTO

Karnataka High Court · October 29, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment