BASAVARAJ KULKARNI v. VITTAL S/O MALLAPPA HULKOPPA
RFA/100428/2022 · 2025-06-18
R Nataraj, Rajesh Rai K
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8591 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8591 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7755-DB RFA No. 100428 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.100428 OF 2022 (PAR/POS)
BETWEEN:
BASAVARAJ KULKARNI S/O. PARAMESHWARAPPA KULKARNI, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O. 1ST CROSS, MANJUNTHPURA, MALMADDI, DHARWAD-580007. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.L. PATIL AND SRI. S.A. SANDUR, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1.
VITTAL S/O. MALLAPPA HULKOPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O. MUGAD-580007, TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD.
2.
MALLAPPA HULKOPPA S/O. THIPPANNA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O. NO. 45, MUGAD-580007, TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD.
3.
SMT. MAHADEVI B. HOSAMANI, W/O. BASAVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O. KADABAGATTI, DHARWAD-581103. …RESPONDENTS (R1 AND R3 ARE SERVED;
APPEAL AGAINST R2 IS ABATED)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC., PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.04.2019 PASSED BY 1ST ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM DHARWAD, IN OS NO.138/2017 AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE SUIT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD Date: 2025.06.19 14:10:45 +0530
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7755-DB RFA No. 100428 of 2022
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.NATARAJ)
Notice issued to respondent No.2 has returned un-served as respondent No.2 has expired. The said notice was returned to the Registry on 30.05.2024. However, no steps are taken till date to bring the legal representatives of deceased-respondent No.2 on record. Hence, the appeal against respondent No.2 stands abated.
In view of the abatement of the appeal as against respondent No.2, the appeal abates in its entirety as respondent No.2 was one of the contesting defendants in the suit.
SD/- (R.NATARAJ) JUDGE
SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE YAN CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 7