- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10666 RSA No. 540 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.540 OF 2014 (INJ) BETWEEN: RICHARD PINTO, S/O ROBERT PINTO, AGED 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT PEDAMALE, NEERUMARGA VILLAGE, MANGALORE TALUK, D.K.DISTRICT - 575 012. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MRS. CYNTHIA D'SILVA NEE PINTO, W/O LOY D'SILVA, AGED 42 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT LOWER BENDORE, 1ST CROSS, MANGALORE, D.K.DISTRICT - 575 007. 2. MRS. IDA D'COSTA, W/O JAMES D'COSTA, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT TRINITY, KALPANE, KULASHEKAR POST, MANGALORE, D.K.DISTRICT - 575 005. Digitally signed by CHAITHRA P Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10666 RSA No. 540 of 2014 3. MRS. EPHROJINE PINTO, SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY R1, R2, R4 AND R5 WHO ARE ALREADY ON RECORD. 4. MR. HEROLD PINTO, S/O LATE ROBERT PINTO, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT PEDAMALE, NEERUMARGA VILLAGE, MANGALORE TALUK, D.K.DISTRICT - 575 012. 5. MR. RONALD PINTO, S/O LATE ROBERT PINTO, AGED 54 YEARS, R/AT PEDAMALE, NEERUMARGA VILLAGE, MANGALORE TALUK, D.K.DISTRICT - 575 012. …RESPONDENTS (R1, R2, R4 AND R5 ARE TREATED AS LR'S OF DECEASED R3 VIDE ORDER DATED 21.02.2019; R4 AND R5 ARE SERVED) THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED 19.12.2013 PASSED IN R.A.NO.185/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE MANGALORE, D.K. ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.11.2007 PASSED IN O.S.NO.486/05 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.), MANGALORE, D.K. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10666 RSA No. 540 of 2014 ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for appellant has filed memo for retirement stating that for want of instructions, he was unable to take steps and therefore, he intends to retire from case. 2. Notice is served. Since sufficient time has lapsed and no alternative arrangement is made, memo for retirement is accepted. Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16