Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19892 (KAR)

NARASIMHAPPA v. SREERAMAPPA

RSA/418/2017 · 2026-06-08

V Srishananda

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27271 RSA No. 418 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 418 OF 2017 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. NARASIMHAPPA S/O LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 2. YERRAPPA S/O LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDENTS AGRAHARA VILLAGE, ROYALPAD HOBLI, SRINIVASPUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. ADINARAYAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SREERAMAPPA S/O LATE REDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS 2. KONAPPA S/O LATE REDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27271 RSA No. 418 of 2017 3. NARASIMHAPPA S/O LATE REDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 4. VENKATARAVANAPPA S/O LATE REDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 5. CHANDRAPPA S/O LATE REDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDENTS AGRAHARA VILLAGE ROYALPAD HOBLI SRINIVASPUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 135. 6. BAYYAMMA S/O LATE PEDDA NARASIMHAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/O BASAPURA VILLAGE CHINTAMANI TALUK CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT - 563 123. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N. BAYYA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R6) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 AND ORDER XLII RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.08.2016 PASSED IN RA NO.194/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KOLAR. DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.9.2014 PASSED IN OS NO.62/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SRINIVASPUR. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27271 RSA No. 418 of 2017 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER None appears for the appellants. Appellant No.1 said to have died and this Court on 25.06.2024, directed to take appropriate steps in respect of appellant No.1. Till today, no steps are taken. Accordingly, appeal stands dismissed as abated insofar as appellant No.1 is concerned by operation of law. It is also noticed that cost imposed by this Court is not paid as such appeal stands dismissed for non prosecution. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5