- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34519 RSA No. 260 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No.260 OF 2026 (RES) BETWEEN: SRI RAVI KUMAR R S/O SRI RAMANNA @ RAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/O KODIHALLI, OLD WARD NO.15, NEW WARD NO.17, BHADRAVATHI-577 301 …APPELLANT (BY SRI B K MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. C MUNIRAJU S/O CHINNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/O S.J ROAD, GIRISH NILAYA, JANNAPURA, BHADRAVATHI -577 301 2. SHIVU S/O LATE ANNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O HOSA KODIHALLI VILLAGE, TARIKERE ROAD, BHADRAVATHI -577 301 3. KRISHNA S/O LATE ANNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O HOSA KODIHALLI VILLAGE, TARIKERE ROAD, Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34519 RSA No. 260 of 2026 BHADRAVTHI -577 301 4. SRI S.RAMESH S/O SRI A.S.KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS PWD CONTRACTOR, R/O MADHAVANAGARA, OLD TOWN, BHADRAVATHI- 577 301 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SRINATHA P.V, ADVOCATE FOR C/R4-ABSENT) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 3.11.2025 PASSED IN R.A.NO.75/2022 ON THE FILE OF PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BHADRAVATHI., DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE ORDER DATED 24.08.2022 PASSED ON APPLICATIONS IN EX NO.297/2012 ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BHADRAVATHI. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri B.K.Manjunath, learned counsel for the appellant. 2. Objector in Execution Case No.297/2012 is the appellant challenging the dismissal of his application filed under Order - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34519 RSA No. 260 of 2026 XXI Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure confirmed by the First Appellate Court in R.A.No.75/2022 dated 03.11.2025. 3. Having perused the records and heard the arguments of Sri Manjunath, this Court noted that no independent right has been propounded and proved by the objector. 4. Therefore, rejection of the application filed under Order XXI Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure is based on factual aspects and requires no further interference, having regard to the scope of Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 5. Hence, the following: ORDER Appeal dismissed. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64