HARISHA S/O BHADREGOWDA, v. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
MSA/35/2024 · 2025-10-15
M G Uma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 87312 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 87312 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40902 MSA No. 35 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 35 OF 2024 (LA) BETWEEN:
HARISHA S/O BHADREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/AT DASSURU VILLAGE, SALAGAME HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK-573 201. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHARADAMBA A R., ADVOCATE) AND:
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, H.R.P.2, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, 1ST FLOOR, HASSAN-573 201. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA) THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(2) OF THE KARNATAKA LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 20.03.2019, PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE 5TH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN IN L.A.C. APPEAL NO.152/2017 AND THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.08.2005, PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION HASSAN, IN L.A.C.NO.159/2000 AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court Of Karnatka
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40902 MSA No. 35 of 2024
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the appellant prays for time to comply with the office objections. Office has raised 7 objections and the same are not complied, even though the matter is listed for non-compliance of office objections for fifth time. The order sheet dated 5.12.2024 reads as under:-
"Finally, two weeks' time is granted to comply the office objections, failing which, the appeal would stand dismissed."
Inspite of the same, there is no compliance of the office objections. Even when the matter was listed before the Registrar P&H on 04.09.2025, there was no representation.
Considering all these facts and the circumstances I am of the view that, the appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal.
Hence, the appeal is dismissed for default i.e., for non prosecution.
Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE AKV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13