- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13818 RSA No. 2457 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 2457 OF 2011 (INJ) BETWEEN: S. SHIVAMADAIAH S/O LATE SANNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O BELAKAVADI VILLAGE, B.G. PURA HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 417. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ABHINAV V, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. KASHYAP N. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA - 571 401. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, MANDYA TALUK, MALAVALLI, MANDYA - 571 430. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA, BANNUR DIVISION, BANNUR, T. NARASIPURA TALUKA, MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 101. Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13818 RSA No. 2457 of 2011 5. CHIKKASIDDAIHA, SON OF KALIMADAIAH,MAJOR, 6. SHIVANNA, S/O CHIKKASIDDAIAH, MAJOR 7. SOMANNA, S/O CHIKKASIDDAIAH, MAJOR 8. RAJU S/O CHIKKASIDDAIAH, MAJOR 9. PRAKASH, S/O CHIKKASIDDAIAH, MAJOR 10. SHEKAR S/O CHIKKASIDDAIAH, MAJOR RESPONDENT NOS. 5 TO 10 ARE RESIDENTS OF BELAKAVADI VILLAGE, B.G. PURA HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUKA, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 417. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAJENDRA K.R, AGA FOR R1 TO R3.,ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 R/W ORDER XLII RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 26.07.2011 PASSED IN R.A.NO.29/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC., MALAVALLI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.03.2010 PASSED IN O.S.NO.83/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) MALAVALLI. 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:13818 RSA No. 2457 of 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT It is seen, though on 11.03.2025 this Court granted time to ascertain date of death of sole appellant, learned counsel for appellant submits that he was unable to ascertain same and has filed memo for retirement. Same is not accompanying with acknowledgement of service, which in present case would be impossible, as sole appellant is dead. Therefore, memo is rejected. Appeal stands dismissed as abated. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AT List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4 CT: BHK