Let Women Not Be at a Disadvantage: Justice B.V. Nagarathna Flags Karnataka Law That Cut High Court's Appeal Powers

Supreme Court judge Justice B.V. Nagarathna has questioned the Karnataka government over 2023 amendments that stripped the Karnataka High Court of its jurisdiction to hear regular first appeals, warning that the change leaves women litigants with almost no realistic remedy in property disputes and has created a procedural muddle over which court should hear certain appeals.

Speaking at the South Zone Regional Conference on "Justice for Women" in Bengaluru, organised by the National Commission for Women with the High Court of Karnataka and the Karnataka Judicial Academy, Justice Nagarathna flagged the shift brought by the Karnataka Civil Courts (Amendment) Act, 2023 and the Karnataka High Court (Amendment) Act, 2023. A judgment and decree passed by a Civil Judge, Senior Division, is now appealable before a District Court, not the High Court, she explained meaning that on a finding of fact, there can be no appeal to the High Court at all.

She illustrated this with a scenario common in Indian courtrooms: a woman aggrieved by a finding of fact on whether an item of property is joint family property or her own separate property. From the District Court, her only option would be to approach the Supreme Court under Article 136. "How many women in Karnataka can approach the Supreme Court?" she asked, pointing to the cost, distance and complexity that make the apex court accessible to very few.

"I wonder why the government of Karnataka has denuded the High Court of its jurisdiction with regard to regular first appeals," Justice Nagarathna said, adding that it interferes with the High Court's independence in deciding matters and disadvantages women litigants and, she noted, even men litigants in the state are worse off on this count compared to other places.

She flagged a deeper structural problem too. Ordinarily, an aggrieved party goes to the Supreme Court only on a question of fact, while a substantial question of law goes to the High Court under Section 100 CPC. But she pointed to a scenario where the Supreme Court remands a matter on a question of fact while a second appeal on the same decree is already pending before the High Court under Section 100. "Should the matter go to the district court, or where should the matter go? As against the same decree, there can't be two forums where an appeal should lie," she said, flagging that the amendment leaves it unclear which court has jurisdiction once proceedings on the same decree are split across forums.

She appealed directly to the state government and the Advocate General to correct the position. "My appeal is to the State Government and also to the learned Advocate General to ensure that this is rectified and there is a repeal of this provision. Let the women of Karnataka not face a disadvantage," she said, noting that the Law Secretary and Chief Secretary were present. A repeal, she added, would not benefit women alone: "Consequently, even the men litigants will benefit by this."

The two amendments were originally brought in by the Congress government under Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, passed by the Karnataka legislature in December 2023, months after the party returned to power in the state.

The remarks come weeks after the Karnataka High Court itself upheld the constitutional validity of both amendments, in a ruling by a division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C.M. Poonacha. While the bench found the state legislature competent to restructure appellate jurisdiction and rejected arguments that the changes were arbitrary, it read down a provision giving the amendments retrospective effect from 2007, limiting their operation to a prospective one. Justice Nagarathna's intervention reopens a debate that the courtroom battle had only partially settled, placing the question back before the state government.

Event: South Zone Regional Conference on "Justice for Women", Bengaluru

Date: August 8-9, 2026