Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 79363 (KAR)

SRI M KRISHNAPPA v. SRI D K MUNIVENKATAPPA

RFA/724/2018 · 2025-10-24

Hanchate Sanjeevkumar

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42390 RFA No. 724 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 724 OF 2018 (INJ) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. M. KRISHNAPPA S/O. LATE BUDUGUPPE MUNISHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT NO.1, DODDAKALLASANDRA VILLAGE, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI KANAKAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU - 62 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. L. VENKATARAMA REDDY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. D.K. MUNIVENKATAPPA S/O. LATE DODDAKUNNAPPA AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS R/AT GOVERNMENT SCHOOL ROAD, DODDAKALLASANDRA VILLAGE, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI KANAKAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU-62 2. SRI. SHAM S/O. AMRUTHMAHAL NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, ESHWARA TEMPLE ROAD, DODDAKALLASANDRA VILLAGE, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI KANAKAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU-62 …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42390 RFA No. 724 of 2018 THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 READ WITH ORDER XLI RULE 1 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.12.2017 PASSED IN O.S. NO.6233/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE XLIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT The appeal is of the year 2018. Learned counsel for the appellant is absent. There are many office objections to be complied with, but till today not complied with. Also, this Court on 09.01.2023 was ordered to issue of notice to the respondents. Upon issuance of notice, respondent No.2 is served and unrepresented and respondent No.1 addressee is deceased but these are not mentioned in the cause list. Even when the office objections are in subsistence, this Court has graciously issued notice to the respondents, but office objections are not complied with. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed for default. SD/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE KA CT-SG