Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 48439 (KAR)

SRI KALSE KANNAPPA v. SMT HALAMMA

RSA/1065/2024 · 2026-01-09

Ravi V Hosmani

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1473 RSA No. 1065 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1065 OF 2024 (INJ) BETWEEN: SRI KALSE KANNAPPA S/O. CHOWDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O, BELALAMAKKI VILLAGE, SAGAR TOWN, SAGAR TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577 401. …APPELLANT [BY SRI BIMBADHARA H M., ADVOCATE (ABSENT)] AND: 1. SMT. HALAMMA W/O. GANAPATHI BULLANA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O, KAMBALIKOPPA VILLAGE, SAGAR TALUK, SHIMOGA DIST. 577 401. 2. M. H PARAMESHWARA, S/O. HUCHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O, BHIMNAKONE ROAD, RAMANAGARA EXTENTION, SAGAR TOWN, 577 401. 3. CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, VIDHANA VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560 001. Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka 2 HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1473 RSA No. 1065 of 2024 4. TAHASILDAR SAGAR TALUK, OFFICE OF THE TAHASILDAR, COURT ROAD, SAGAR TOWN-577 401. …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.02.2024 PASSED IN RA NO.16/2021 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SAGAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.08.2021 PASSED IN OS NO.265/2013 ON THE FILE OF PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., SAGAR. 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 V 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.: 67