- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25040 RSA No. 1487 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1487 OF 2013 (INJ) BETWEEN: MR KESHAVA GOWDA S/O VENKAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS LAND OWNER R/AT KAKVE ALANKAR VILLAGE, PUTTUR TALUK POST ALANKAR 574 201 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. CYRIL PRASAD PAIS, ADVOCATE) AND: MR NEMANNA GOWDA S/O MR. NAGAPPA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT ALANKAR VILLAGE, PUTTUR TALUK POST ALANKAR 574 201 DAKSHINA KANNADA …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K SHRIHARI, BY LEX JUSTICA, ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD 30.3.2013 PASSED IN R.A.NO.28/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ACJM, PUTTUR, D.K, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25040 RSA No. 1487 of 2013 CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.12.2007 PASSED IN O.S.NO.11/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) PUTTUR, D.K. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT It was reported that sole respondent passed away long back. 2. The appellant did not file necessary applications to bring the legal representatives of deceased respondent on record. The suit is for a bare injunction. 3. From the perusal of the contents of the plaint, it is noticed that the allegation of interference in the plaintiff’s/appellant’s peaceful possession of the suit property, is against the defendant/respondent, who passed away long back. In view of the death of the respondent the suit for bare injunction would come to an end. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25040 RSA No. 1487 of 2013 4. The said view is supported by the judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of Smt. Bhagwanti Vs. Sri. Kanshi Ram through LRs reported in ILR 2011 Delhi 444. 5. Further the coordinate bench of this Court, referring to the judgment of the Delhi High Court, in the case of Usha Gopal Gowda Vs. M.T. Tharanath in W.P.No.15445/2015, disposed of on 12.10.2018 in paragraph No.12 held that no cause of action is alleged against the legal representative of the defendant and cause of action alleged in the plaint was against the defendant alone, against whom the relief of injunction was sought. 6. Admittedly, in the instant case, the cause of action shown in the plaint as against the sole defendant and not against the legal representatives of the deceased respondent. Hence, due to cause of death the appeal abates against the defendant. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25040 RSA No. 1487 of 2013 7. In view of the same, the appeal is dismissed as abated. 8. However, a liberty is reserved to the appellant to file a suit against the legal representatives of the deceased respondent, if need arises. In view of the dismissal of the appeal, I.A.No.2/2023 does not survive for consideration and accordingly, disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE BVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39