- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9187 RSA No. 539 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 539 OF 2014 (SP) BETWEEN: 1. RUDRAPPA S/O DASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O AMRUTHAPURA VILLAGE, HOLALKERE TALUK-577 526 CHITRADURGA DISTRICT. 2. THIMMAKKA W/O MALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O GUNTANUR, GOLLARAHATTI VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK-577 501. …APPELLANTS [BY SRI R.SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE (AB)] AND: 1. SHIVAMMA W/O DYAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YAERS, R/O GOPPENAHALLI VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK-577 213. 2. THIMMAMMA W/O SIDDARAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O AGRAHARA VILLAGE, HOLALKERE TALUK-577 526. Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9187 RSA No. 539 of 2014 3. GOWRAMMA W/O SHIVAMURTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O GANGUR VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK-577 213. 4. GOVINDAPPA S/O THIMMAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O AMRUTHAPURA VILLAGE, HOLALKERE TALUK-577 526. 5. SAVITRAMMA W/O GOWDAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O AMRUTHAPURA VILLAGE, HOLALKERE TALUK-577 526. 6. BHAGYAMMA W/O RAMACHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O AMRUTHAPURA VILLAGE, HOLALKERE TALUK-577 526. 7. BASAVARAJAPPA S/O THIMMAPPA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O AMRUTHAPURA VILLAGE, HOLALKERE TALUK-577 526. 8. KALINGAPPA S/O DASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST BY PROFESSION R/O AMRUTHAPURA VILLAGE TALYA HOBLI, HOLALKERE TALUK-577 526, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS [BY SMT. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., ADVOCATE FOR R2-R7 (AB); R8 - SERVED] THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED 09.12.2013 PASSED IN R.A.NO.6/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9187 RSA No. 539 of 2014 ADDITIONAL MACT, HOLALKERE, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.12.2006 PASSED IN O.S.NO.63/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) HOLALKERE. THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL JUDGMENT Though matter was passed over and called again, there is no appearance. More than a year ago, it was noticed that respondent No.1 had remained unserved despite four unsuccessful attempts. Till date, application for substituted service is not filed. This would indicate that appellants are not pursuing appeal diligently. Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12