- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47792 MSA No. 36 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 36 OF 2024 (LA) BETWEEN: 1. PUTTAMMA W/O LATE SIDDAPPASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS 2. MANJASHETTY S/O LATE SIDDAPPASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS 3. JAYANNA S/O LATE SIDDAPPASHETTY AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 4. PUSHPA D/O LATE SIDDAPPASHETTY AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 5. SUJATHA D/O LATE SIDDAPPASHETTY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT GUNDASHETTYHALLI VILLAGE, SALAGAME HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK - 573 201 …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. SHARADAMBA A.R., ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND: THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, H.R.P.2, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, 1ST FLOOR HASSAN - 573 201 …RESPONDENT Digitally signed by NANDINI B G Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47792 MSA No. 36 of 2024 THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.54(2) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.04.2019 PASSED IN LAC. APPEAL. NO.429/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE 5TH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.09.2005 PASSED IN LAC.357/2002 ON THE FILE THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) HASSAN., PARTLY ALLOWING THE REFERENCE PETITION FILED UNDER 18(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT. THIS MSA, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellants is absent. No representation even when the matter is passed over twice and again called out. 2. Cost of Rs.500/- was not paid and there are nine office objections, which are not yet complied with. 3. The order sheet dated 25.09.2025 reads as under: "Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks short accommodation to cure the office objections including payment of Court fee. Finally, two weeks' time is granted to cure the office objections on payment of cost of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47792 MSA No. 36 of 2024 Rs.500/- to the Karnataka State High Court Legal Services Committee." 4. Inspite of that, there is no representation. It appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non prosecution. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE BH CT:VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11