- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3190 RSA No. 837 of 2025 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. 837 OF 2025 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: SRI SIDDAIAH S/O. LATE GAVIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/AT LINGIKATTE COLONY, HEBBUR HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 120. …APPELLANT (BY SRI SOMASHEKHARAIAH R.P., ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. SRI GANGANARASAIAH S/O LATE NARASINHAIAH, SINCE DEAD BY LRS. SMT. BORAMMA, W/O LATE GANGANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, 2. SMT. KAMALA @ KAMALAMMA, D/O LATE GANGANARASAIAH, W/O HANUMANTHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 3. SRI MURTHY, S/O LATE GANGANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3190 RSA No. 837 of 2025 4. SMT. RADHAMMA, D/O. LATE GANGANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 5. SRI MOHANKUMARA, S/O. LATE GANGANARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF LINGIKATTE, KARADIGERE KAVAL, HEBBUR HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT-572120 6. SMT. GOWRAMMA, W/O. MARILINGAIAH, D/O. LATE NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, 7. SRI MARILINGAIAH, S/O MALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF DOMMANAKUPPE VILLAGE, HEBBUR HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT-572120 …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.11.2024 PASSED IN RA NO.62/2023 ON THE FILE OF VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, TUMAKURU., DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 14.03.2023 PASSED IN OS NO.118/2016 ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TUMAKURU AND ETC., THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3190 RSA No. 837 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL JUDGMENT This matter is listed for orders on non-compliance of office objections for fourth 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.: 58