Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 38279 (KAR)

M.R.MANJUNATH AKALWADI v. SRI. M. R. SATYANARAYAN

RFA/100054/2022 · 2025-11-27

B Muralidhara Pai, R Devdas

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16562-DB RFA No. 100054 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100054 OF 2022 (DEC/PAR) BETWEEN: SRI. M.R.MANJUNATH AKALWADI AGE: 73 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. AKALWADI COMPOUND, JANAKIRAM BUILDING, BAARAKOTRI, DHARWAD-580001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S.R.HEGDE AND ASSOCIATES, SRI. SAGAR S.HEGDE, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. SRI. M. R. SATYANARAYAN AGE: 82 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. OPP. MODERN TALKIES, P.B. ROAD, DHARWAD-580001. 2. RAJU S/O. M. R. SATYANARAYAN AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. OPP. MODERN TALKIES, HUBLI ROAD, DHARWAD-580001. 3. RAMAMURTHY S/O. M. R. SATYANARAYAN AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. OPP. MODERN TALKIES, HUBLI ROAD, DHARWAD-580001. 4. SUJATA W/O. RAJU AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. OPP. MODERN TALKIES, HUBLI ROAD, DHARWAD-580001. RAKESH S HARIHAR Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.11.28 10:10:21 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16562-DB RFA No. 100054 of 2022 M. R. MAHABALESHWAR, SINCE DECEASED BY LRS., 5. SMT. VIJAYA LAXMI W/O. MAHABALESHWAR SHETTI AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. KOHALLI, POST AYANUR VENKATESHWAR MEDICALS, TQ AND DIST: SHIMOGA-577211. 6. SMT. ANITA W/O. ULLAS ANEGUNDI AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. HOUSE NO.80, NEELAMBARI NIVAS, VASAVI NAGAR, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580030. 7. SRI. ARVIND S/O. MAHABALESHWAR SHETTI AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. KOHALLI, POST. AYANUR VENKATESHWAR MEDICALS, TQ AND DIST: SHIMOGA-577211. 8. SRI. ANIL S/O. MAHABALESHWAR SHETTI AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. KOHALLI, POST. AYANUR VENKATESHWAR MEDICALS, TQ AND DIST: SHIMOGA-577211. 9. M.R. NAGRAJ AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. B H ROAD, AYANUR VILLAGE, TAL AND DIST: SHIMOGA-577211. 10. M. R. SOMASHEKAR AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. SAPTAGIRI RICE MILL, GAJNUR VILLAGE, TQ AND DIST: SHIMOGA-577202. 11. M. R. ASHOK KUMAR AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. B. H ROAD, AYANUR VILLAGE, TQ AND DIST: SHIMOGA-577211. 12. M. R. ARUN KUMAR AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, PROP. JANAKIRAM BOOK DEPOT, OPP. OLD BUS STAND, DHARWAD-580001. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16562-DB RFA No. 100054 of 2022 13. M. R. KRISHNAMURTHY AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. AYANUR, TAL. AND DIST: SHIMOGA-577211. 14. SMT. CHANDRALEKHA W/O. TRIYAMBAK ANEGUNDI, AGE: 69 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. GANDHI NAGAR, DHARWAD-580004. 15. SMT. ANURADHA W/O. ARUN KUMAR AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. GANDHI NAGAR, DHARWAD-580004. 16. SMT. PRAMILA W/O. SATYANARAYAN AGE: 79 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. OPP. MODERN TALKIES, HUBLI ROAD, DHARWAD-580001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.V.SOMAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 TO R/R4 AND C/R16; NOTICE TO R5 TO R7, R9, R11, R13 AND R14 ARE SERVED; NOTICE TO R4 AND R16 IS HELD SUFFICIENT; R10 IS ABATED) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.11.2020 PASSED IN O.S.NO.191/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DHARWAD, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR DECLARATION, MESNE PROFITS, PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND ETC. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS COURT MADE THEREIN AS UNER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16562-DB RFA No. 100054 of 2022 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS) Matter is called out. There is no representation for the appellant. However, we see that although this appeal is dismissed against respondent No.10 as abated, no steps have been taken by the appellant to get the matter restored insofar as respondent No.10 is concerned. 2. Further, having regard to the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of SURESH CHANDRA (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS VS PARASRAM & OTHERS (2025 INSC 873), the appeal not only abated against the deceased respondent, but also against all the respondents. 3. In that view of the matter, the Regular First Appeal stands dismissed as abated. Sd/- (R.DEVDAS) JUDGE Sd/- (B. MURALIDHARA PAI) JUDGE MBS Ct:vh