- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4111 RFA No. 2281 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2281 OF 2019 (DEC/POS) BETWEEN: 1. G NARASIMHA MURTHY, S/O LATE G GOVINDASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, NO.6/15, MAVALLI TANK BUND ROAD CROSS, RAJAGOPAL GARDEN, BANGALORE-560002. 2. G VINAYAKA MURTHY, S/O LATE G GOVINDASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, NO.6/15, MAVALLI TANK BUND ROAD CROSS, RAJAGOPAL GARDEN, BANGALORE-560002. 3. G VASANTHI, W/O LATE GOPI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 4. MONESH, S/O LATE G GOPI, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 5. KABALESH, S/O LATE G GOPI, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER SMT G VASANTHI 3 TO 5 CURRENTLY RESIDING AT C/O G NARASIMHA MURTHY NO.6/15, MAVALLI TANK BUND ROAD CROSS RAJAGOPAL GARDEN, BANGALORE-560002. Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4111 RFA No. 2281 of 2019 6. G KALAVATI, D/O LATE G GOVINDASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, C/O G NARASIMHA MURTHY NO.6/15, MAVALLI TANK BUND ROAD CROSS RAJAGOPAL GARDEN, BANGALORE-560002. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI G NARASIMHA MURTHY - A1, SRI G VINAYAKA MURTHY - A2, SRI G VASANTHI - A3, SRI MONESH - A4, SRI KABALESH - A5, SRI KALAVATHI - A6 (ABSENT)) AND: 1. G SATHI, MAJOR BY AGE, NO.95, RAJAGOPALA GARDEN, KALASIPALIYAM, BANGALORE-560002. 2. SMT ALAMELU, W/O G SATHI, MAJOR BY AGE NO.160, I PHASE RAJAGOPLA GARDEN, KALASIPALIYAM, BANGALORE-560002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI T R RAJESHAWARI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLI RULE 1 R/W SEC.96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.05.2019 PASSED IN O.S.NO.2957/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION, POSSESSION AND INJUNCTION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4111 RFA No. 2281 of 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT This case was listed under the caption 'dismissal' and the learned counsel for the appellants had retired on earlier occasion and the Court directed the Registry to list the matter under the caption of dismissal in case of no representation. 2. There is no representation on behalf of the appellants. 3. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE GVP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25