Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 50596 (KAR)

SRI REVANNA v. SMT NANJAMMA

RSA/2129/2023 · 2026-01-06

Ravi V Hosmani

Original Suitbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:859 RSA No. 2129 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 2129 OF 2023 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: 1. SRI REVANNA S/O KUNNEGOWDA AND SMT GOWRAMMA, MINOR, ADOPTED SON OF SMT. NANJAMMA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT KARLAHALLI, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK. 2. SRI KUNNEGOWDA S/O NACHEGOWDA @ DADIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT KARLAHALLI, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK. 3. SMT. GOWRAMMA W/O KUNNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT YEARS, RESIDENT OF KARLAHALLI, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK. …APPELLANTS [BY SRI SIDDAPPA V D., ADVOCATE (AB)] AND: SMT. NANJAMMA W/O LATE NACHEGOWDA, @ SONNAIDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT KARLAHALLI, Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:859 RSA No. 2129 of 2023 VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK. …RESPONDENT THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENTS AND DECREE PASSED BY THE COURTS IN RA NO.55/2012 DATED 22.04.2013 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHANNAPATTANA, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT AND ALSO COMMON JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED IN O.S.NO.20/1996 AND O.S.NO.24/1997 DATED 18.12.2008 PASSED BY THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DCN.) AT CHANNAPATTANA. 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 fifth 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.: 113