Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5327 (KAR)

SHRI.KALLAPPA S/O TIPPANNA YALIVAL v. KUMAR SAMPATKUMAR

RFA/100141/2017 · 2025-04-04

Umesh M Adiga

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:11750 RFA No. 100141 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 100141 OF 2017 (PAR/POS) BETWEEN: SHRI. KALLAPPA S/O TIPPANNA YALIVAL, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: KERI ONI, UNKAL, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 021. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. JAGADISH PATIL AND SRI. NAVEEN.R.MELINAMANI., ADVOCATES [ABSENT]) AND: 1. KUMAR SAMPATKUMAR S/O GANGADHAR AKKIYAVARU, AGE: MINOR, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: C/O: ARALI KOTRAPPA, NEW 12TH WARD, POST: CHITWADGI, TQ: HOSAPETE, DIST: BALLARI-583 201. SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.2. 2. SMT. ASHWINI @ ARLIMANJULA W/O GANGADHAR AKKUYAVARU, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE-WIFE, R/O: C/O: ARALI KOTRAPPA, NEW 12TH WARD, POST: CHITWADGI, TQ: HOSAPETE, DIST: BALLARI-583 201. 3. SMT.GURUSHANTAMMA W/O MAHARUDRAPPA AKKIRAVARU, Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:11750 RFA No. 100141 of 2017 AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSE-WIFE, R/O: 25TH WARD, BALIGAR ONI, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 024. 4. SMT. KALPANA W/O PRAKASH ANDRAL, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O: ASHWINI NAGAR, TQ AND DIST: HAVERI-58110. 5. SHRI. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O MAHARUDRAPPA AKKIRAVARU, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: 25TH WARD, BALIGAR ONI, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 024. 6. SHRI. GANGADHAR S/O MAHARUDRAPPA AKKIRAVARU, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: 25TH WARD, BALIGAR ONI, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580 024. 7. SMT. UMA @ VIDYA W/O NAGRAJ KADDIPUDI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O: ASHWINI NAGAR, TQ AND DIST: HAVERI-58110. 8. SMT. SHRIDEVI W/O AJIT YELAMALI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O: SONY APARTMENT, LINGRAJ NAGAR, HUBBALLI, DIST: DAHRWAD-580021. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VEERESH.R.BUDIHAL., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R2; SRI. R.G. DHONGADI., ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R8) THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908. THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS LISTED FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:11750 RFA No. 100141 of 2017 ORAL ORDER Though matter called twice, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant, either personally or through video conferencing. When the matter is listed before the Court, and is called out, the advocate must be present in the Court. His or her absence may effect the case. As could be seen from the appeal papers, the appeal is filed in the year 2017. Now we are in the month of August 2024. The appeal is pending from seven years. As already noted above, though matter called twice, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant, either personally or through video conferencing. It appears that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the Regular First Appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN LIST NO.: 3 SL NO.: 13