Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24084 (KAR)

SMT. MARAMMA v. SIDDASHETTY

RSA/81/2017 · 2026-06-25

V Srishananda

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31724 RSA No. 81 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 81 OF 2017 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1A. SMT. MARAMMA @ DODDATHAYAMMA, W/O LATE HUCHANNASHETTY, D/O LATE KARIMADASHETTY, SINCE DEAD BY LRS SMT MAHADEVAMMA W/O LATE LINGASETTY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 1B. LOKESH S/O LATE HUCHANNASETTY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 1C. SMT GAYATHRAMMA W/O LATE MALLESH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 1D. ARAVIND S/O LATE MAHESH AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS 1E. AMRITHA D/O LATE MALLESH AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31724 RSA No. 81 of 2017 LRS 1A TO 1E ARE R/AT KODAGAHALLI VILLAGE, BANOORU HOBLI, T NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 124 1F. SMT CHIKKATHAYI W/O ANGASETTY, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT MANDAGANA HALLI VILLAGE, MALAVALLI TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 430 2. SMT MAHADEVAMMA D/O LATE KARIMADASHETTY, W/O GUDI MARISHETTY, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/AT VAJAMANGALA VILLAGE, VARUNA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK - 570 010 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SHRIDHARA K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SIDDASHETTY S/O LATE KARIMADASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS 2. BASAVARAJASHETTY S/O LATE KARIMADASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS SIDDAMMA D/O LATE KARIMADASHETTY, SINCE DEAD BY LRS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31724 RSA No. 81 of 2017 3A. CHIKKANNA NINGASETTY, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS 3B. SIDDAPPA S/O CHIKKANNA NINGASETTY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 3C. MAYAMMA W/O LATE MARISETTY, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 3D. PRAMILA D/O LATE MARISETTY, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS 3E. BHAGYA D/O LATE MARISETTY, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS 3F. MAMATHA S/O LATE CHIKKANNA NINGASETTY, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS 3G. CHIKKANNA S/O LATE MARISETTY, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS 3H. GOWRAMMA D/O LATE CHIKKA NINGASETTY, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 3I. RAJAMMA D/O LATE CHIKKA NINGASETTY, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31724 RSA No. 81 of 2017 ALL ARE R/AT VAJAMANGALA VILLAGE, VARUNA HOBLI - 570 010 MYSORE TALUK 4(I). SMT LEELAVATHI W/O ANANTHARAMU, SINCE DEAD BY LRS ANANTHARAMU H/O SMT LEELAVATHI, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 4(II). YOGEETHA D/O ANANTHARAMU AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS 4(III). SANGEETHA D/O ANANTHARAMU AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS 4(IV). YOGENDRA @ NAGESHA S/O ANANTHARAMU AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS LRS OF RESPONDENT NO.4(I) TO 4(IV) ARE R/AT DOOR.NO.1188, 7TH CROSS, SIDDAPPAJJI GUDI, SUNNADA KERI, K.R. MOHALLA, MYSORE - 570 024 …RESPONDENTS (R1, R2, R3(B TO G) SERVED VIDE ORDER DATED 11.06.2026, APPEAL AGAINST DECEASED R3(A) DISMISSED AS ABATED VIDE ORDER DATED 11.06.2026, APPEAL AGAINST DECEASED R3 (H AND I), R4 (I TO IV) DISMISSED AS ABATED) - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31724 RSA No. 81 of 2017 THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.4.2016 PASSED IN RA NO.493/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU. ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.06.2014 PASSED IN OS NO.356/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. SR.CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER None appears for the appellant. Even on the last date of hearing, there was no representation on behalf of the appellant. 2. This Court thus, noting the absence of the counsel for appellant dismissed the appeal as against 3(a), 3(h and i) and 4(i to iv) as abated. In the interest of justice, the Court listed the matter for 'admission' today. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant is absent and it is the plaintiff's appeal challenging the dismissal of the suit by the First Appellate Court in RA No.493/2014 setting aside the decreeing of the suit in part in OS No.356/2009. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31724 RSA No. 81 of 2017 4. Suit is one for partition, which stood dismissed by the First Appellate Court, noting that plaintiff has failed to make out a case that she has got share in the suit property. 5. The appeal itself is of the year 2017, yet to be admitted. Accordingly, appeal stands dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE BH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34