Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 91510 (KAR)

SMT JAYAMMA v. DR B NATARAJU

RSA/766/2020 · 2025-11-13

Jyoti M

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46284 RSA No. 766 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 766 OF 2020 (RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. JAYAMMA W/O. LATE RAJU, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 2. SRI. CHALUVARAJU S/O. LATE RAJU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 3. SMT. MANJULA D/O. LATE RAJU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.385, 8TH CROSS, GANDHINAGARA, MANDYA - 571 401. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. H.V.PRAVEEN GOWDA, ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. DR.B.NATARAJU S/O. LATE B.BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT D.NO.B.2/326, NATIONAL GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 047. Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46284 RSA No. 766 of 2020 2. B.SHIVANANJAPPA, S/O. LATE B.BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.536, 5TH 'A' CROSS, 4TH MAIN, 9TH BLOCK, NAGARABHAVI, 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 072. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ARJUN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.S.NARAYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100, ORDER 42 RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS LISTED FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Though matter called twice, the appellants are not represented. When the case is listed and called out, the advocate must be present. The absence may affect the case. Sri.Arjun., counsel on behalf of Sri.M.S.Narayan., for the respondents has appeared in person and submits that a memo has been filed and the same may be placed on record. Submission is noted. Memo is placed on record. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46284 RSA No. 766 of 2020 As could be seen from the appeal papers, the appeal is filed in 2020. Now we are in November, 2025. The appeal is pending for five years. As already noted above, though matter called twice, the appellants are not represented. It appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Because of dismissal of the appeal, pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of and interim direction if any stands discharged. Sd/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE TKN/MRP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 6