- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3989 RSA No. 932 of 2023 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. 932 OF 2023 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. B.S.KUBER SINGH S/O SURAJBHAN SINGH AGED 57 YEARS, 2. SRI. SHANKAR NARAYANA SINGH, S/O SURAJBHAN SINGH AGED 54 YEARS, 3. SRI. B.S. BALAJI SINGH, S/O SURAJBHAN SINGH AGED 58 YEARS …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. VINAYA KUMAR N.D., ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. SRI. T.MUNIYAPPA S/O NAYAKARA THIMMAPPA SINCE DIED BY LRS N. DEVANAND BABU, S/O LATE T MUNIYAPPA, AGED 68 YEARS, R/AT NO. 80 FEET ROAD, TURNING DOOR NO. 301, 7TH MAIN, II BLOCK, HRBR LAYOUT, KALYAN NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 043 Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3989 RSA No. 932 of 2023 2. N. AMARA GOVINDA BABU S/O LATE T. MUNIYAPPA, AGED 66 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO. 312, 8TH MAIN ROAD, I-BLOCK, HRBR LAYOUT, KALAYANAGAR BANGALORE - 560043 3. SMT. JEEVA RATHANA, S/O LATE AMARA GOVINDA BABU, AGED 58 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO. 312, 8TH MAIN ROAD, I-BLOCK, HRBR LAYOUT, KALAYANAGAR BANGALORE - 560043 …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.11.2022 PASSED IN RA.No.80/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AND JMFC, MALUR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE ORDER DATED 26.04.2014 PASSED IN OS No.107/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE IST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MALUR, REJECTING THE PLAINT FOR THE RELIEF OF DECLARATION OF TITLE. 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:3989 RSA No. 932 of 2023 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.: 85