Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 46253 (KAR)

SRI M B JOSLI MANTHERO v. PERSIDENT

RSA/137/2025 · 2026-01-20

Ravi V Hosmani

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3200 RSA No. 137 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 137 OF 2025 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: SRI M.B. JOSLI MANTHERO S/O. LATE BALTHUJAR MANTHERO, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT MAGGE VILLAGE, K.H. HOBLI, ALUR TALUK. HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201. …APPELLANT (BY SRI NAGARAJ D., ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. PRESIDENT SOCIETY OF MERI, ST. MARIS CONVENT, R/O MAGGE VILLAGE, K.H. HOBLI, ALUR TALUK, HASSAN REP BY SMT. MARY JARALD 2. SMT. A.M. CHANDRAKALA W/O LATE M.P. MOHAN, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 3. SMT.M. SMITHA, D/O. LATE M.P. MOHAN, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 4. SRI. M. PRAJWAL, D/O. LATE M.P. MOHAN, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 4 ARE Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3200 RSA No. 137 of 2025 R/AT HAROHALLI VILLAGE, K.H. HOBLI, ALUR TALUK. HASSAN-573201 …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 13.12.2024 PASSED IN RA NO.60/2023 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN., ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE, CONSEQUENTLY DISMISSED THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.03.2023 PASSED IN OS NO.66/2016 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HASSAN, 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 ORAL JUDGMENT This matter is listed for orders on non-compliance of office objections for fifth time. Despite sufficient opportunity having been granted for compliance earlier, appellant was 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 appellant is not diligently pursuing appeal. Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 88