- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1481 RSA No. 1760 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. 1760 OF 2023 (PAR/POS) BETWEEN: H. B. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O. BASAPPA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT HOLEKOPPA VILLAGE, BASAVANI POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 432. …APPELLANT [BY SRI ASHWATH C.M.,ADVOCATE (ABSENT)] AND: 1. H. B. GURUMURTHY S/O. BASAPPA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT HOLEKOPPA VILLAGE, BASAVANI POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 432. H. B. SRINIVASAMURTHY S/O. BASAPPA GOWDA, DEFENDANT NO.2 IN TRAIL COURT AND RESPONDENT NO.2 IN APPELLATE COURT SINCE DEAD BY LRS., R/AT HOLEKOPPA VILLAGE, BASAVANI POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 432. Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1481 RSA No. 1760 of 2023 2. MANJULA D/O. H. B. SRINIVASAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT HOLEKOPPA VILLAGE, BASAVANI POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 432. 3. MAMATHA D/O. H. B. SRINIVASAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT HOLEKOPPA VILLAGE, BASAVANI POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 432. 4. 5. H. B. THIMMAPPA S/O. BASAPPA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/AT HOLEKOPPA VILLAGE, BASAVANI POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 432. PADMAVATHI, W/O RAMESH K.T., AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/A KELAHEDDARI, KADTHRU POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577 432. …RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.06.2023 PASSED IN RA NO.14/2021 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, THIRTHAHALLI., DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.01.2021 PASSED IN OS NO.155/2015 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, THIRTHAHALLI. THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1481 RSA No. 1760 of 2023 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.: 83