- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29309 RSA No. 1588 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1588 OF 2011 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: 1. SIDDALINGAPPA, S/O KARI BASAVAIAH, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS SRI. PRABHULINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 2. SRI. VRUSHBENDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 3. SRI. THRINETHRASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 4. SRI. DAIVAGNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, ALL ARE SONS OF LATE SIDDALINGAPPA, R/O KALLENAHALLI VILLAGE, GUBBI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 560 104. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI.R.H.PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHANMUKHAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. REVANA SIDDAIAH SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29309 RSA No. 1588 of 2011 1. SMT. RATHNAMMA, D/O REVANASIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 2. SMT. SIDDARAMAKKA, W/O SOMANNA, MAJOR 3. 3(a) SRI. RENUKAIAH, AGE: MAJOR, SINCE DECEASED LRS OF DECEASED R3 GANGAMMA, W/O LATE RENUKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT KALLENAHALLI VILLAGE, NITTUR HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 562 102. 3(b) SMT.RENUKA, W/O SIDDALINGAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT BETTADAHALLI POST, GUBBI TALUK, HAGALAVADI HOBLI, TUMKUR - 562 102. 3(c) DAYANANDA, S/O LATE RENUKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT KALLENAHALLI VILLAGE, NITTUR HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 562 102. 3(d) DEVARAJ, S/O LATE RENUKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/AT KALLENAHALLI VILLAGE, NITTUR HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 562 102. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29309 RSA No. 1588 of 2011 4. SRI. SADASHIVAIAH, AGE: MAJOR, ALL ARE DAUGHTERS AND S/O LATE REVANASIDDIAH, R/O KALLENAHALLI VILLAGE, NITTUR HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 560 104. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.S. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3(a to d); VIDE ORDER DATED 13.10.2025 APPEAL AGAINST R1 AND R2 IS DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT; R4 SERVED UNREPRESENTED) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.3.2011 PASSED IN R.A.NO.100/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, GUBBI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.12.2002 PASSED IN O.S.NO.329/1988 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DNl) & JMFC., GUBBI. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellant files an application I.A.No.1/2025 for recalling the order dated 13.10.2025 and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29309 RSA No. 1588 of 2011 I.A.No.2/2025 for substituted service by way of paper publication in respect of respondent Nos.1 and 2. 2. It is unfortunate that this RSA was filed in the year 2011 and appellant was unable to get it serve the copies against respondent Nos.1 and 2 for a period 14 years and ultimately, the order was passed by this Court on 13.10.2025 that steps were not taken and also in the order sheet, it is referred that the matter is of the year 2011, still the service is not completed and even the paper book is also not filed. However, this Court held that appeal against respondent Nos.1 and 2 is dismissed for default and again, two weeks time was given to file the paper book and directed to list the matter thereafter. 3. Even in spite of the order passed on 13.10.2025 by giving two weeks time to file paper book, but till date, paper book was not filed. Hence, it clearly discloses that though appeal was admitted in the year 2019, till 2026, paper book is not filed in spite of sufficient opportunity given. This Second Appeal is filed against the concurrent finding of dismissal of the suit by both the Courts below. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29309 RSA No. 1588 of 2011 4. Hence, I do not find any grounds to consider I.A.No.1/2025 for recalling the order of dismissal dated 13.10.2025 in respect of respondent Nos.1 and 2 and also question of permitting to take substituted service against respondent Nos.1 and 2 does not arise and even against respondent No.3 also, in not pursuing the matter by the appellant though appeal was admitted in 2019 and even after lapse of seven years, paper book is not filed and on the previous occasion, two weeks time was also given to file paper book and the same is also not complied. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Consequently, I.A.Nos.1/2025 and 2/2025 are rejected. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23