- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1464 RSA No. 1489 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. 1489 OF 2023 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: SMT. HAMEEDA KHANUM W/O LAT E ABDUL JABBAR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.4796 17/1 KOLAR ROAD, VIJAYAPURA TOWN DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT. …APPELLANT [BY SMT. RACHITHA RAJSHEKAR, ADVOCATE (ABSENT)] AND: 1. 1(a) SMT. SYEDUNNISA D/O SYED ALI, SINCE DEAD BY LRS SHAHEENA W/O NOORULLA D/O SYEDUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT NO. 921, 4TH CROSS, GOVINDPUR MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE -45. 2. 2(a) SRI. RAFIQ AHMAD S/O LATE ABDUL SAMEED DEAD BY LRS ANEES UR REHMAN S/O LATE RAFEEQ AHMAD, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1464 RSA No. 1489 of 2023 2(b) MUJEED UR REHAMAN S/O LATE RAFEEQ AHMAD AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 2(c) AWAIZ UR REHAMAN S/O LATE RAFEEQ AHMED AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, 2(d) FARHANA BEGUM D/O LATE RAFEEQ AHMAD AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 2(e) FARIDA MUJASSIM D/O LATE RAFEEDQ AHMAD AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, 2(f) FIRODOSEUNNISA D/O LATE RAFEEQ AHMAD, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT KOLAR ROAD, VIJAYAPURA TOWN, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT. 3. FAHEEDA BEGUM W/O RAFIQ AHMAD, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT KOLAR ROAD, VIJAYAPURA TOWN, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.03.2023 PASSED IN RA NO.3/2018 ON THE FILE OF IIND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPURA, SITTING AT CHINTAMANI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 5.12.2017 PASSED IN OS NO.111/2006 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHIDLAGHATTA. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1464 RSA No. 1489 of 2023 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 IV 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.: 15