Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 45322 (KAR)

SRI H R SREENIVAS v. SMT KAMALAMMA

RSA/17/2025 · 2026-01-13

Ravi V Hosmani

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2131 RSA No. 17 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 17 OF 2025 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: 1. SRI H R SREENIVAS S/O LT RAMANUJA IYENGAR AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT NO.A-6 "A" LANE, BARLI STREET POLICE QUARTERS SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE 560 027. 2. SMT. VASANTHA B K., W/O LATE H R NARAYAN R/AT NO. 329, 25TH CROSS, 2ND STAGE BANASHANKARI, BANGALORE 560 027. &APPELLANTS (BY SRI SREE NAGESH B R., ADVOCATE - ABSENT) AND: 1. SMT. KAMALAMMA, W/O H B SHRIKANTAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT BRAHMANA STREET, HAMPAPURA VILLAGE, HOSA AGRAHARA HOBLI, K R NAGAR TALUK K R NAGARA 571602 Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2131 RSA No. 17 of 2025 2. THE SECRETARY HAMPAPURA GRAMA PANCHAYAT HAMPAPURA VILALGE HOSA AGRAHARA HOBLI, K R NAGARA 571 602. 3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH HASSAN ROAD K R NAGARA 571 602 &RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 1.10.2024 PASSED IN RA NO.23/2020 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, K.R. NAGARA., DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.06.2016 PASSED IN OS NO.9/2011 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, K.R. NAGAR.TRIAL COURT DISMISSED THE SUIT. APPELLATE COURT DISMISSED THE APPEAL. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2131 RSA No. 17 of 2025 ORAL ORDER This matter is listed for orders on non-compliance of office objections for 5th time. Despite sufficient opportunity having been granted for compliance earlier, appellants were directed to comply with office objections till closure of Court hours. However, there is no representation and office objections remained un-complied. This would indicate that appellants are not diligently pursuing appeal. Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE Psg* List No.: 2 Sl No.: 82