- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22751 RSA No. 67 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 67 OF 2009 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: K NARAYANAPPA, S/O LATE KORAMAIAH, R/AT GANDLAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, KASABA HOBLI, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 101, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS. 1(a) SMT MUNIYAMMA, W/O K NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 1(b) SRI GOPALA, S/O K NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, 1(c) SMT PADMA, D/O K NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, 1(d) SRI CHANDRA, S/O K NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, 1(e) SMT GAYATHRI, D/O K NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING OF R/AT GANDLAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, KASABA HOBLI, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 101, (AMENDMENT CARRIED OUT AS PER ORDER DT:26.11.2010) …APPELLANTS (BY SRI N KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR A1(A) TO A1(E) (ABSENT) Digitally signed by C HONNUR SAB Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22751 RSA No. 67 of 2009 AND: 1. KORAMAIAH, S/O LATE MUNINANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 2. NARAYANAPPA, S/O LATE MUNINANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, 3. SRIRAMEGOWDA S/O LATE MUNINANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, 4. NAGARAJ, S/O LATE MUNINANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT GANDLAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, KASABA HOBLI, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MURALI N, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4) THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD 11.11.08 PASSED IN R.A.NO 90/08 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, (SR.DN), & CJM., KOLAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DTD 21.2.08 PASSED IN OS 148/06 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE, (JR.DN) AND JMFC SRINIVASAPUR. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22751 RSA No. 67 of 2009 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER The case was called out in the morning session. Even in the afternoon session, there is no representation on behalf of the appellants. 2. This case was listed on 20.06.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the appellants. However, a week's time was granted to do the needful and it was ordered to be listed for dismissal in case process fee is not paid. 3. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. Appeal is of the year 2009. This Court does not find any reason to adjourn the matter. 4. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE GVP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19