- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5009 RSA No. 1001 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1001 OF 2022 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: 1. AMEER PASHA S/O LATE CHIKKA ALIMIA SAB AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 2. HUSSAIN S/O LATE CHIKKA ALIMIA SAB AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS DIED AS BACHELOR 3. ANSAR S/O LATE CHIKKA ALIMIA SAB AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS 4. MOHAMMED ALI S/O LATE CHIKKA ALIMIA SAB AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 5. LIYAQHAT ALI S/O LATE CHIKKA ALIMIA SAB AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 6. RAHAMAT ALI S/O LATE CHIKKA ALIMIA SAB AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 7. KHADAR ALI S/O LATE CHIKKA ALIMIA SAB AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS 8. SMT. MAHABOOB BEE S/O LATE CHIKKA ALIMIA SAB AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS DIED AS SPINSTER Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5009 RSA No. 1001 of 2022 9. SMT. GHOUSIA S/O LATE CHIKKA ALIMIA SAB AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS NO.1 TO 9 ARE RESIDING AT KUMBARPET SIDLAGHATTA TOWN CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT PIN-562105. 10. SRI AMEERJAN S/O NAME NOT KNOWN R/AT KUMBARPET SIDLAGHATTA TOWN CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT PIN-562105. 11. K PYAREJAN @ KHALEEMULLA S/O MOHAMMED IBRAHIM AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/AT GANDHINAGAR SIDLAGHATTA TOWN CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT PIN-562105. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SRINIVASA MURTHY S R., ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: NOOR UI ULOOM WELFARE TRUST REP BY S A MUNAWAR S/O S P SYED ANWAR R/AT KADRIPALYA SIDLAGHATTA TOWN CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 562 105. …RESPONDENT THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.10.2021 PASSED IN RA.NO.44/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPURA, SITTING AT CHITAMANI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND MODIFIED THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 22.02.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO.197/1997 ON THE - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5009 RSA No. 1001 of 2022 FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SIDLAGHATTA AND ETC., THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL JUDGMENT Though matter was passed over and called again, there is no representation for appellants. Matter is listed for orders on non-compliance of office objections for seventh time. Despite sufficient opportunity having been granted for compliance earlier, even on cost, office objections remained un-complied and cost is also not paid. This would indicate that appellants are not diligently pursuing appeal. Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4