- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17058 RSA No. 1750 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1750 OF 2013 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. HONNE GOWDA, S/O LATE PATEL CHANNE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 2. SRI. T.H. NAGENDRA PRASAD, S/O HONNE GOWDA, AGED AOBUT 35 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF T.S. CHATTRA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 434. …APPELLANTS [BY SRI V. JAVAHAR BABU, ADVOCATE (AB)] AND: 1. KUM. KAVYA, D/O T.H. NAGENDRA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, 2. MASTER KARTHIK, S/O T.H. NAGENDRA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS, BOTH ARE MINORS AND REP. BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, SMT. PREMA W/O T.H. NAGENDRA PRASAD AND R/O JANATHA COLONY, HOSAHUNDAVADI VILLAGE, BELAGOLA HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 606. Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17058 RSA No. 1750 of 2013 3. SMT. KUSUMA, D/O HONNE GOWDA, W/O RAMESHA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/O INGALKUPPE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 434. 4. SMT. T.H. PADMAVATHI ALIAS MANJULA, (ALIAS MANJULA IS ADDED V/O DATED:02.11.2015) D/O HONNE GOWDA, W/O KUMARA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O HOSAYELEKERE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 434. …RESPONDENTS (V/O DATED 03.04.2025 APPEAL IS DISMISSED AGAINST R1 & R2 AS ABATED; R3 & R4 SERVED) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 R/W ORDER 42 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.08.2013 PASSED IN R.A.NO.151/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE MANDYA, SITTING AT SRIRANGAPATNA, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.06.2011 PASSED IN O.S.NO.62/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) JMFC AND MACT, AT PANDAVAPURA. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISISON, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17058 RSA No. 1750 of 2013 ORAL JUDGMENT As per order dated 03.04.2025, appeal was dismissed as abated against respondents no.1 and 2 and matter was ordered to re-listed today to consider survival of appeal. There is no appearance, it is seen that this is defendants appeal in suit for partition, wherein respondents no.1 and 2 are plaintiffs. Since appeal is dismissed against plaintiffs, appeal against others would not survive for consideration. Hence, appeal is dismissed in entirety. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE GRD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37