- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:25686 RSA No. 460 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 460 OF 2013 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: SRI. H.C. NARASIMHAIAH , S/O CHIKKA MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, R/AT HUJAGUR VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SIDDALAGHATTA TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT - 562 105. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. NARAYANASWAMY, ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND: SRI. H.C. SIDDAPPA, S/O CHIKKA MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/A HUJAGUR VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SIDDALAGHATTA TALUK CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT - 562 105. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. N. THIMMEGOWDA, ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED 23.11.2012 PASSED IN R.A.NO.11/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE ITINERY SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC., SIDLAGHATTA, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.11.2007 PASSED IN OS.NO.56/1999 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) & JMFC., AND ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) (CONCURRENT CHARGE). THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Digitally signed by NARAYANAPPA LAKSHMAMMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:25686 RSA No. 460 of 2013 JUDGMENT 1. The appellant is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: (a) Kindly call for records of O.S.No.56/1999 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) at Siddalaghatta and R.A. R.A.No.11/2008 on the file of the Itinery Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, At Sidlaghatta. (b) Kindly set aside the Judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.56/1999 dated 27-11-2007 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) at Siddalaghatta and (c) Kindly set aside the Judgment and decree dated 23- 11-2012in R.A.No.11/2008 on the file of the Itinery Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, At Sidlaghatta. (d) Kindly allow the above appeal and kindly order decreeing the suit of the plaintiff in O.S.. 56/1999 on the file of Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) at Siddalaghatta., as prayed for. 2. Despite the order dated 11.06.2024, none appears for the appellant today also though called twice. 3. A perusal of the order sheet indicates that none has been appearing for the appellant for the last two years. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- JUDGE GJM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15 CT: BHK