KALLESHAPPA S/O RAMAIAH SINCE DEAD BY LRS v. HANUMANTHAPPA @ HANUMANTHAIAH
RSA/2035/2008 · 2025-11-07
M I Arun
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 74111 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 74111 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45363 RSA No. 2035 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.2035 OF 2008 (RES)
BETWEEN:
1. KALLESHAPPA S/O RAMAIAH SINCE DEAD BY LR'S,
SMT. SIDDAMALLAMMA W/O LATE KALLESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
2.
SMT. GANGAMMA W/O LATE KALLESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
3. MALLIKARJUNA S/O LATE KALLESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
4. RAVI S/O LATE KALLESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
5. SHIVAMURTHY S/O LATE KALLESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location:
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45363 RSA No. 2035 of 2008
6. RAMESHAPPA S/O LATE KALLESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
7.
ARUNA KUMARA S/O LATE KALLESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF ARAKERE VILLAGE JAVAGAL HOBLI ARSIKERE TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT-573 103. …APPELLANTS
[BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR G., ADVOCATE (ABSENT)]
AND:
1.
HANUMANTHAPPA @ HANUMANTHAIAH S/O BEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
2.
2(a). MANJAPPA S/O BEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
SINCE DEAD BY LR'S
DHARMAPPA S/O LATE MANJAPPA
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45363 RSA No. 2035 of 2008
BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF ARAIKERE JAVAGAL HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 103.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VAKKUND S. GANAPAT RAO, ADVOCATE)
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC., PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.07.2008 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AND ADDL.CJM, AT ARSIKERE IN R.A.NO.36/2005, ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45363 RSA No. 2035 of 2008
ORAL JUDGMENT
None appears for the appellants. The appeal is of the year 2008. It appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed for non-prosecution.
Sd/-
(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE
hkh. List No.: 2 Sl No.: 6