Can High Court Dismiss a Second Appeal for Non-Compliance of Office Objections and Non-Payment of Costs? — Karnataka HC

Quick Facts

• Case Title: Kamalamma & Another v. Honnappaji
• Decision Date: 11-07-2025
• Court: High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru
• Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.P. Sandesh
• Appeal Under: Section 100 CPC (Regular Second Appeal No.1024 of 2022)
• Procedural Issue: Dismissal for non-payment of costs (₹500) and non-compliance of office objections
• Outcome: Appeal dismissed for non-compliance

Practical Impact

• BINDING ON: All subordinate courts and benches of Karnataka HC
• PERSUASIVE FOR: Other High Courts grappling with procedural dismissals
• OVERRULES: None
• DISTINGUISHES: N.A.
• FOLLOWS: Established CPC provisions on costs & compliance

Metadata Summary

• Bench: Single-Judge (Justice H.P. Sandesh)
• Citation: NC:2025:KHC:25434
• Precedent Value: Binding in Karnataka; persuasive elsewhere
• Type of Law: Civil Procedure
• Questions of Law:
  • Can non-payment of court-fixed costs and failure to comply with office objections warrant summary dismissal?
  • Scope of inherent and CPC powers to enforce procedural rules.

What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note

• Reinforces that High Courts may invoke Section 100 CPC read with their inherent powers to strike off appeals for procedural default.
• Courts need not await a substantive hearing where costs are unpaid and office objections remain unaddressed.
• Advocates must strictly adhere to cost orders and office requirements or risk summary disposal.

Summary of Legal Reasoning

• Section 100 CPC empowers High Courts to hear second appeals, but non-compliance with preliminary requirements (cost payment; office objections) invites exercise of inherent power to dismiss.
• Judicial discipline and docket management justify dismissal without entering merits.
• No need for elaborate inquiry into case substance where appellant fails to satisfy preconditions.