- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3992 RSA No. 531 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. 531 OF 2025 (PAR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SHIVAMMA W/O R.VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 2. SMT. V.ROOPA, D/O R.VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, THE APPELLANTS NO.1 AND 2 ARE RESIDING AT NALLICHERUVU VILLAGE, PATHAPALYA HOBLI, BAGEPALLI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 561212 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SHIVARAMA A., ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. SRI. C RAMAPPA S/O LATE CHIKKA VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS, 2. SMT. LAKSHMIDEVAMMA W/O C.RAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, THE RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2 ARE R/AT NALLICHERUVU VILLAGE, PATHAPALYA HOBLI, BAGEPALLI TALUK, Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3992 RSA No. 531 of 2025 CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 561212 3. SMT.SARASWATHI @SARASWATHAMMA D/O C RAMAPPA, W/O SHIVASHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT MALLASANDRA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, BAGEPALLI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 561207 4. SMT.M.S SOBHA, W/O OBALESH D/O SHIVASHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT 7TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, GARUDACHARYA PALYA, MAHADEVAPURA, BENGALURU - 560 048. 5. SRI. VENKATASUBBAREDDY S/O CHINNAPPAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/AT KAMASANAPALLI VILLAGE, PATHAPALYA HOBLI, BAGEPALLI TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 561212 …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 31.01.2025 PASSED IN RA NO.1/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPURA, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE ORDER DATED 28.07.2023 PASSED ON I.A.NO.5 IN OS NO.340/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BAGEPALLI. ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.5 FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(a) R/W SEC.151 OF CPC, FOR REJECTION OF PLAINT AND ETC., - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3992 RSA No. 531 of 2025 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 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.: 93