Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 34816 (KAR)

SRI LAKSHMANA REDDY v. RAMAPPA

RSA/1457/2013 · 2026-08-03

Ashok S Kinagi

Original Suitbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010373432013 NC: 2026:KHC:40646 RSA No. 1457 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1457 OF 2013 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: SRI LAKSHMANA REDDY S/O SUBBAREDDY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/A BANDE HOSAHALLI VILLAGE Y.N. HOSAKOTE HOBLI PAVAGADA TALUK TUMKUR DIST 572101 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. HARISH H V &., SHEKARAPPA, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. RAMAPPA S/O MOOLEMANE HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/A BANDE HOSAHALLI VILLAGE Y.N. HOSAKOTE HOBLI PAVAGADA TALUK TUMKUR DIST 572101 2. EASWARAPPA S/O MOOLEMANE HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/A BANDE HOSAHALLI VILLAGE Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010373432013 NC: 2026:KHC:40646 RSA No. 1457 of 2013 Y.N. HOSAKOTE HOBLI PAVAGADA TALUK TUMKUR DIST 572101 3. MOOLEMANE HANUMANTHAPPA S/O ERAPPA SINCE DEAD (THE LRS OF R3 ARE ALREADY ON RECORD AS R1 & R2) …RESPONDENTS (BY ANIL ASSOCIATES FOR R1 R2 SERVED V/O DATED 11.03.2019 R1 & R2 ARE TREATED AS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF DECEASED R3) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD 13.7.2012 PASSED IN R.A.NO.109/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC., MADHUGIRI, ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.2.2001 PASSED IN O.S.NO.81/1980 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) & JMFC., PAVAGADA. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010373432013 NC: 2026:KHC:40646 RSA No. 1457 of 2013 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The sole appellant passed away on 21.04.2025. Despite granting sufficient time, the legal representatives of the deceased sole appellant have not filed application to come on record. As such, the appeal has abated by operation of law. 2. Accordingly, this regular second appeal is dismissed as abated. 3. In view of the dismissal of the appeal, pending interlocutory application(s), if any, does not survive for consideration and accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE RK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 12