- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:861 RSA No. 648 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 648 OF 2024 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: (A) SRI. V.R. JAGANNATHAPPA, DEAD BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES SUVARNAMMA WIFE OF LATE V R JAGANNATHAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS (B) V J PRASANNA KUMAR SON OF LATE V R JANANNATHAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS (C) V J RAMESH KUMAR SON OF LATE V R JAGANANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS ALL THE ABOVE ARE RESIDING AT NO.237 2ND MAIN ROAD 3RD A CROSS BEHIND ECI FACTORY THIMMAIAH EXTENSION VIDYANAGARA T DASARAHALLI BENGALURE-560 057 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NANDA KUMAR B L.,ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. SAROJAMMA, WIFE OF GOVINDAIAH Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:861 RSA No. 648 of 2024 AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 2. NARASIMHAURTHY SON OF GOVINDAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 3. PUTTARANGAIAH SON OF LATE RANGASWAMY AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT VAKKODU VILLAGE BELLAVI HOBLI TUMKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.02.2024 PASSED ON IA NO.I IN RA NO.61/2020 ON THE FILE OF VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMAKURU., DISMISSING IA NO.1 FILED UNDER SEC.5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT., AND FILED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.09.2012 PASSED IN OS NO.30/2007 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, TUMKUR., REJECTING THE PLAINT FILED UNDER ORDER VII RULE 11(d) OF CPC. 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:861 RSA No. 648 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT This matter is listed for orders on non-compliance of office objections for V 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.: 117