- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3195 RSA No. 685 of 2024 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. 685 OF 2024 (INJ) BETWEEN: ELIAS FERNADES @ ALLAN FERNADES S/O ROJARI FERNANDES, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT SHIRUPATHI VILLAGE, HOSAMATA, SANKADAHOLE (P) THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PANDURANGA NAYAK U, ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. THERAJA FERNANDES W/O VIGNESH FERNANDES, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT SANKKADAHOLE POST, NERATOOR VILLAGE, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT. 2. SUNIL D'SOUZA S/O VIGNESH FERNANDES, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT SANKKADAHOLE POST, NERATOOR VILLAGE, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT. 3. CLORINA FERNANDES, W/O ANTHONEY CROS, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3195 RSA No. 685 of 2024 R/AT BEHIND AROGYA MATHE CHURCH, HARIHARA TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. 4. ANTHONY CROS, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/O BEHIND AROGYA MATHE CHURCH, HARIHARA TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. 5. NAGENDRA, S/O MANJUNATHA KULA, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS R/AT SANKKADAHOLE POST, NERATOOR VILLAGE, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT. 6. GANESHA, S/O RAGHU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT SANKKADAHOLE POST, NERATOOR VILLAGE, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT. 7. SANJAYA ACHARI S/O RAMAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/AT SANKKADAHOLE POST, NERATOOR VILLAGE, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC., AGAINST JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED IN O.S.No.150/2019 DATED 07.12.2020 AND ALSO THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY THE APPELLATE COURT IN R.A.No.7/2024 DATED 18.03.2024 CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF THE TRIAL COURT AND ALLOW THE APPEAL BY GRANTING THE RELIEF IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3195 RSA No. 685 of 2024 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.: 70