Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 38119 (KAR)

BHARATESHGOUDA V PATIL v. RUDRAPPA MUDAKAPPA KARIYAVAR

RSA/5855/2010 · 2025-10-14

C M Joshi

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13853 RSA No. 5855 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.5855 OF 2010 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: 1. MR. BHARATESHGOUDA V PATIL S/O. LATE VARDHAMANGOUDA R PATIL, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. KOGILGERI, POST: ARAVATGI-580007, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 2. MR. JAYAPALGOUDA PATIL AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. KOGILGERI, POST: ARAVATGI-580007, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 3. MR. JINAPPA YELLUR AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. KOGILGERI, POST: ARAVATGI-580007, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. P.V. GUNJAL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. RUDRAPPA MUDAKAPPA KARIYAVAR AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. KOGILGERI, POST: ARAVATGI-580007, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. 2. MR. BASAPPA GURAPPA PAGAD AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O. KOGILGERI, POST: ARAVATGI-580007, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.K. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2-ABATED) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 R/W. ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18TH JUNE 2010, PASSED IN R.A.NO.145/2010 BY THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD BY WHICH THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15TH DECEMBER 2004, IN O.S.NO.588/1988 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DIV.) DHARWAD PRL. JMFC., DHARWAD HAD BEEN SET ASIDE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Date: 2025.10.16 10:47:42 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13853 RSA No. 5855 of 2010 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI) It is seen from the records that on 29.08.2025 and 12.09.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the appellants. Therefore, it appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. SD/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE RKM CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 64