Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 48981 (KAR)

LATE MAYACHAR SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS SRI SHANKARACHAR v. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

RSA/1447/2023 · 2026-01-09

Ravi V Hosmani

Original Suitbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1480 RSA No. 1447 of 2023 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. 1447 OF 2023 (INJ) BETWEEN: 1. LATE MAYACHAR SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS SRI SHANKARACHAR S/O LATE MAYACHAR, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 2. SRI. NAGESHACHAR S/O LATE MAYACHAR, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, 3. SRI. CHANDRACHAR S/O LATE MAYACHAR, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT OPP. TO MALLESHWARA TEMPLE, CHANNAPATTANNA EXTENSION, HOLENARASIPURA ROAD, HASSAN - 573 201. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI K S GANESHA, ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN - 573 201. Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1480 RSA No. 1447 of 2023 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HASSAN SUB - DIVISION, HASSAN - 573 201. 3. THE THASHILDAR HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN - 574 201. 4. GOVT. OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU- 560 001 REP BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY. …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.07.2023 PASSED IN RA.NO. 21/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HASSAN, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.08.2021 PASSED IN O.S.NO.347/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HASSAN. 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:1480 RSA No. 1447 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT This matter is listed for orders on non-compliance of office objections for VI 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.: 82