- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17922 RSA No. 5980 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.5980 OF 2011 (DEC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. RATNABAI W/O. VITTALSA KATWA, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. ANAND NAGAR, HUBBALLI- 580 020, DIST. DHARWAD. 2. SHRI VITTALSA NARAYANSA KATWA AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. ANAND NAGAR, HUBBALLI- 580 020, DIST. DHARWAD. …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. RATNABAI W/O. VITTALSA KATWA, APPELLANT-ABSENT) AND: 1. THE PRESIDENT SURYAVANSHA KSHATRIYA KALAL YUVAK MANDAL (REGD), NO.216, ANAND NAGAR, HUBBALLI-580 020, DIST. DHARWAD. 2. THE SECRETARY, SURYAVANSHA KSHATRIYA KALAL YUVAK MANDAL (REGD), NO.216, ANAND NAGAR, HUBBALLI- 580 020, YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Date: 2025.12.12 11:50:40 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17922 RSA No. 5980 of 2011 DIST. DHARWAD. 3. SMT. AKKAMMA HIREMATH AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. ANAND NAGAR, OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI- 580 020, DIST. DHARWAD. 4. THE COMMISSIONER HUBBALLI- DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, HUBBALLI 580 010, DIST. DHARWAD. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.I. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R4; R1-HELD SUFFICIENT; R2 AND R3-NOTICE SERVED) THIS RSA IS FILED U/S. 100 R/W. ORDER XLII RULE 1 OF C.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 24.08.2011 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HUBBALLI IN R.A.N0.126/2008 AND RESTORE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.10.2008 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.), HUBBALI IN O.S.NO.70/2003 AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS THROUGHOUT BY DECREEIING THE SUIT OF THE APPELLANTS IN O.S.NO.70/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE JR.DN. HUBBALLI AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17922 RSA No. 5980 of 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has filed a memo of retirement. The notice and the postal report show that the notice has been served upon the appellant. Therefore, the learned counsel for the appellants is permitted to retire. None appeared for the appellants despite service of the notice issued by the learned counsel for the appellants. Therefore, it appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. SD/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE RKM CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 2