Karnataka High Court
Civil Procedure and EvidenceCivil Law

Karnataka High Court holds Order 43 appeal not maintainable before it and transfers case to District Court under Civil Courts Act

ADAM KUNHI vs K ALIMA

Karnataka High CourtJUDGMENT: September 19, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Karnataka High Court holds Order 43 appeal not maintainable before it and transfers case to District Court under Civil Courts Act. ADAM KUNHI vs K ALIMA. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The appellant filed an appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC against the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Bantwal’s order dated 5 August 2019 allowing the respondents’ application for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC in O.S. No. 36/2018.

Source reference: p.15

The High Court considered the appeal at the admission stage and addressed its maintainability.

Source reference: p.15; para. 1
02

Issues

Whether the appeal was maintainable before the High Court in view of Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964 and the cited precedent?

Source reference: p.15; para. 1

If not, whether the matter should be transferred to the competent District Court for adjudication from the stage at which it stood?

Source reference: p.16; para. 2
03

Law Applied

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 c/w W.A. No. 200260 of 2025, dated 8 July 2026, which it noted had been affirmed by the Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 025075/2026 on 3 August 2026.

Source reference: p.15; para. 1

The judgment states that these authorities rendered the appeal not maintainable before the High Court; it does not set out their reasoning or further explain the scope of Section 19(1).

Source reference: p.15; para. 1
04

Reasoning

Applying Section 19(1) and the cited, Supreme Court-affirmed precedent, the Court concluded that this appeal was not maintainable before it.

Source reference: p.15; para. 1

It therefore directed transfer of the case record to the Principal District and Sessions Judge for assignment to the competent appellate court, preserving adjudication from the stage at which proceedings had stopped.

Source reference: p.16; para. 2 and order, clauses (ii)–(iii)

The Court made no findings on the merits and left the parties’ rights and contentions open.

Source reference: p.17; order, clause (iv)
05

Holding

The High Court held the appeal not maintainable before it and disposed of it for statistical purposes.

It directed the Registry to transfer the entire record, including any pending applications, to the concerned Principal District and Sessions Judge for assignment to the appellate court having jurisdiction; the matter was listed before the District Court on 28 October 2026.

Source reference: pp.16–17; order, clauses (ii), (iii) and (v)

No opinion was expressed on the merits.

Source reference: p.17; order, clause (iv)
06

Acts & Sections Cited

2 provisions across 2 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Code of Civil Procedure, 19081

KARNATAKA CIVIL COURTS ACT, 19641

Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

ADAM KUNHIvsK ALIMA

Karnataka High Court · September 19, 2026

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment