1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.100467 OF 2018 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. ASHOK JYOTIRAM SALUNKE AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: KUNDGOL, TQ: KUNDGOL, DIST:DHARWAD. 2. PRAMOD @ PRAVEEN JYOTIRAM SALUNKE AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: KUNDGOL,TQ: KUNDGOL, DIST: DHARWAD. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. PRAKASH S. UDIKERI, ADVOCATE (ABSENT) ) AND: 1. SHANKAR S/O TUKARAM SALUNKE AGE:71 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: KUNDGOL, TQ: KUNDGOL, DIST: DHARWAD. 2. SMT JANABAI W/O MARUTI JADAVA, AGE:73 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD, R/O. MANJUNATH NAGAR, HAVERI,TQ AND DIST:HAVERI. 3. SHIVAJI S/O. RAJARAM JADAVA AGE: 83 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: MARATHA GALLI, HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 2 4. SMT. PUSHPA W/O SUBRAMANYA SURVE AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: SHAMANUR ROAD, NEAR LAXMI FLOOR MILL, DAVANAGERE, TQ AND DSIT: DAVANAGERE. 5. SHRIKANT S/O SHIVAJI JADAVA AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS, R/O: MARATHA GALLI, HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. 6. SHOBHA D/O SHIVAJI JADAVA AGE:50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: MARATHA GALLI, HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST:DHARWAD. 7. PANDURANG S/O SHIVAJI JADAVA AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: MARATHA GALLI, HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST:DHARWAD. … RESPONDENTS THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.03.2018, PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., KUNDGOL, IN R.A.NO.70/2016, CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.02.2016, PASSED IN O.S.NO.7/2004, ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., KUNDGOL, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL AND DISMISSING THE SUIT OF THE PLAINTIFF IN O.S.NO.7/2004, ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., KUNDGOL, ETC.,. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Though the matter is called twice, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. 3 The appeal is filed in the year 2018. The appeal is listed for orders regarding non compliance of office objections for fourth time. As already noted above, the matter is called twice, there is no representation on behalf of the appellant. The appeal is dismissed for non prosecution and also for non compliance of office objections. Sd/- JUDGE MRK