- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22391 RSA No. 1452 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1452 OF 2021 (PA/DE/IN) BETWEEN: 1. CHIKKAVENKATAMMA SINCE DECEASED BY HER LEGAL HEIRS SMT. MANJAMMA @ MANJULA W/O RAMESH D/O CHIKKAVENKATAMMA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT MADUGURKI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. 2. SMT. SANJEVAMMA W/O AKKAYYAPA D/O CHIKKAVENKATAMMA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT MADUGURKI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT. 3. NARAYANAMMA SINCE DECEASED BY HER LRS SMT. VARALAKSHMI, W/O NANJUNDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS 4. KARIVENKATAPPA S/O LATE MUNIRANGAMMA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22391 RSA No. 1452 of 2021 BOTH APPELLANT NO.3 AND 4 ARE RESIDENT OF BUDUMANAHALLI VILLAGE HESARAGHATTA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU-561 203. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. BALARAJ A.C. AND SRI. MITHUN KUMAR Y.G., ADVOCATES) AND: 1. K.B. MUNIYAPPA S/O LATE BYATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS 2. RANGAPPA S/O LATE BYATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF KAKOLU VILLAGE HESARAGHATTA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU-561 203. …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.06.2020 PASSED IN R.A.NO.49/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.01.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO.1085/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22391 RSA No. 1452 of 2021 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT When the matter was listed on 11.06.2025, this Court has noticed that earlier cost imposed was deposited and also further observed that, even though matter is listed 5th time for non-compliance, the office objections have not been complied and on further cost of Rs.500/-, granted two weeks time to comply with the office objections. However, neither the cost is paid nor the office objections are complied with. This Court also observed that, appellant No.1 is no more and hence, permitted to bring the legal representatives of deceased appellant No.1 on record within two weeks from today. 2. On perusal of the appeal memorandum, it is seen that already the legal representatives of appellant No.1 are brought on record, but no application is filed seeking permission to bring the legal representatives of deceased appellant No.1 on record. 3. The proxy counsel submits that learned counsel for the appellants has informed that parties are not assisting him to comply with the office objections. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22391 RSA No. 1452 of 2021 Hence, for non-payment of cost and non-compliance of office objections, the appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9