- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26110 RFA No. 336 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No. 336 OF 2020 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. GANGAMMA W/O. LATE KONANIKA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS. 2. SMT. SUNITHA J K D/O. LATE KONANAIKA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 3. SMT. SAVITHA J K D/O. LATE KONANAIKA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT No.284 ’B’ BLOCK, 10TH CROSS, J.P. NAGAR MYSORE – 570 008. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SRINIVASA D C, ADVOCATE - ABSENT) AND: 1. SMT. G K ANITHA W/O. G CHANDRU RESIDING AT No. 3566 VEERANGERE LASHKAR MOHALLA MYSURU – 570 001. 2. SMT. SUNITHA J K W/O. N NAGENDRA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS. Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26110 RFA No. 336 of 2020 3. SRI. AJAY J K S/O. LATE. KONANAIKA G S AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R 2 AND R3 ARE RESIDING AT No.284 ’B’ BLOCK, 10TH CROSS J.P. NAGAR MYSORE – 570 008. …RESPONDENTS THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 09.07.2018 PASSED IN OS No. 595/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MYSURU DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION PREFERS THIS APPEAL IN SO FAR AS DECREEING THE SUIT OF THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT No.1 AND 2 FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION ALLOTTING 7/36TH SHARE IN ITEM No.1 AND 1/6TH SHARE IN ITEM No.2 OF THE SUIT SCHEDULE PROPERTIES AND FURTHER DISMISS THE SUIT OF THE PLAINTIFF AND ALSO ALLOW COUNTER CLAIM OF THE DEFENDANT No.5, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL JUDGMENT None appear for the appellants. 2. This Court vide order dated 09.11.2021 had issued notice to respondents and directed the appellants to pay necessary process fee in the Registry during the course of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26110 RFA No. 336 of 2020 the day. Thereafter the matter came to be listed on 07.02.2024 and on that day also counsel for the appellants had sought time to do the needful. Thereafter on 02.06.2025 the matter was listed and on that day also two weeks time has been granted to take necessary steps as a last chance. 3. Considering the above aspect, inspite of granting sufficient time even after lapse of four years, requisites are not furnished for issue of notice. It appears that appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE DKB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1