- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13876 RSA No. 904 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.904 OF 2010 (SP) BETWEEN: 1. VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA, 2. SHANTHAMMA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, D/O VENKATARAMANAPPA, 3. RAVI KUMAR AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA, ALL ARE R/AT KOPPALU VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK-562110. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI VENKATARAMANAPPA AND OTHERS (PARTY-IN-PERSON)) AND: SRI GOVINDARAJU AGED 55 YEARS, S/O THAMMAIAHPPA R/AT JAKKURU, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI R.S. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED 07.12.2009 PASSED IN R.A.NO.52/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13876 RSA No. 904 of 2010 TRACK COURT, DEVANAHALLI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.06.2007 PASSED IN O.S.NO.152/1995 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) & JMFC., DEVANAHALLI. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL JUDGMENT This Court on 29.10.2022 passed the following order: “Learned counsel for the appellants has filed a memo along with three notices sent to the appellants intimating his intention to retire from the brief. The notices dated 29.08.2019 are produced along with two postal acknowledgements and one envelope with an endorsement that the addressee is absent. Learned counsel for the appellants is permitted to retire from the brief. Registry is directed to show the name of the appellants in the cause list. List this appeal on 14.11.2022.” - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13876 RSA No. 904 of 2010 2. Learned counsel for the appellants has already retired from the case in the year 2022. The name of the appellants are shown in the cause list. 3. There is no representation on behalf of the appellants. 4. The appeal is of the year 2010. It appears that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the Regular Second Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA AT List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43