- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35931 RSA No. 1962 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1962 OF 2017 (PAR) BETWEEN: SMT NAGAMMA W/O CHIKKNNA RESIDING AT PADUVARAHALLI ADJACENT TO RAMAMANDIRA MYSURU-570 010 …APPELLANT (BY SRI SIDDHARTH RAJARAM KALYANPUR, FOR SRI SAMPATH BAPET, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. SMT LAKSHMI W/O CHANDRA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/O AT DASARAGUPPE VILLAGE SHETTYHALLI HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571 438 2. SRI JOGEGOWDA S/O HALINA JOGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS 3. SMT ANKAMMA W/O BALAREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS 4. SMT KEMPAMMA D/O JOGEGOWDA Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35931 RSA No. 1962 of 2017 AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 5. SRI SHIVANNA S/O JOGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS 6. SMT KEMPAMMA W/O LATE SIDDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS RESPONENTS 2 TO 6 ARE RESIDING AT MARATIKYATHANAHALLI VILLAGE, JAYAPURA HOBLI MYSURU TALUK AND DISTRICT- 570010 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.K.MOHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI SRIDHAR.R, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R5 –ABSENT; VIDE ORDER DATED 20.02.2023, NOTICE TO R6 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED 22.06.2017 PASSED IN R.A.NO.708/2016 (OLD NO.27/2016) ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 13.04.2015 PASSED IN O.S.NO.428/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. II CIVIL JUDGE, MYSORE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35931 RSA No. 1962 of 2017 ORAL ORDER Memo with copy of sale deed is filed by learned counsel appellant. Same is taken on record. In view of the same, no subsisting right is available in the appellant to prosecute the appeal further. 2. Accordingly placing the memo on record, appeal stands dismissed as it has rendered infructuous. 3. It is made clear that the subsequent purchasers from the appellant are entitled to protect their interest by taking recourse to the appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE MR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 88