- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3990 RSA No. 23 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 23 OF 2025 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SUSHEELAMMA W/O LATE BALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT HULUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANDAGUDI HOBLI, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT 2. SRI. MANJUNATH W/O LATE BALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, HULUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANDAGUDI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT. 3. SRI. KRISHNAPPA W/O LATE BALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, HULUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANDAGUDI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT. 4. SRI. VENKATESHA W/O LATE BALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, HULUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANDAGUDI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGLARE RURAL DISTRICT. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. BASAVANNA M D., ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3990 RSA No. 23 of 2025 AND: 1. SRI CHIKKA GOPALAPPA S/O LATE CHIKKA APPAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT HULUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANDAGUDI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT 2. SRI. KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE CHIKKA APPAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT HULUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANDAGUDI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT 3. SMT. MUNIAKKAYAMMA W/O LATE PILLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, R/AT KAMBALIPURA VILLAGE, SULIBELE HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.11.2024 PASSED IN RA.NO.25/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.12.2018 PASSED IN OS.NO.2042/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE (R) DIST. BANGALORE. TRIAL COURT DISMISSED THE SUIT AND ETC., THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3990 RSA No. 23 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT This matter is listed for orders on non-compliance of office objections for sixth 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 AV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 90