- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21454 RSA No. 2055 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 2055 OF 2012 (SP) BETWEEN: SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O CHIKKARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O K.H.B. GOLDEN JUBILEE COLONY, BHADRAVATHI, THROUGH HER GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SRI. CHIKKARAMAIAH, S/O CHIKKA THAMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/O 88/A, K.H.B. GOLDEN JUBILEE COLONY, BHADRAVATHI POST, TALUK, SHIMOGA DIST.-577 301. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA PATTANASHETTY, ADV. (ABSENT)) AND: 1. SRI S.Y. TAGORE @ CHANNIGARAME GOWDA S/O YALAKKI GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, EMPLOYEE IN SERICULTURAL DEPT., 2. SRI. RAMACHANDRE GOWDA S/O YALAKKI GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, 3. SMT. SHIVAMMA W/O LATE RANGEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,HOUSE HOLD WORK, Digitally signed by C HONNUR SAB Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21454 RSA No. 2055 of 2012 4. SRI. VARADARAJU S/O LATE RANGE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, 5. SRI. RAVI S/O LATE RANGE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, 6. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE RAMAKRISHNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 7. SMT. PREMA D/O LATE RAMAKRISHNE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, HOUSE HOLD WORK, ALL ARE R/O SANABA VILLAGE, ALISANDRA POST, NAGAMANGALA TALUK, MANDYA DIST.-571 432. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.V. PRAKASH, ADV. FOR R1, R3 TO R7; V/O.DATED 12.07.2019, APPEAL AGAINST R2 IS ABATED) THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DATED 21.04.2012 PASSED IN R.A.NO.47/2007 ON THE FILE OF ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC., BHADRAVATHI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.06.2007 PASSED IN O.S.NO.273/2005 ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, (JR. DN.) AND JMFC., BHADRAVATHI. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21454 RSA No. 2055 of 2012 ORAL JUDGMENT It is submitted that, since 2019, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. It is further submitted that, in respect of the same property, the appellant has suffered a decree for redemption of mortgage and the defendant, in the said suit for redemption of mortgage, has not filed a suit for specific performance. The same is dismissed and the first appellate court concurred with the said finding. 2. Since there is no representation on behalf of the appellant since 2019, the appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE RS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42