- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2114 RSA No. 1621 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1621/2024 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: 1. SMT ANNAPURNADEVI @ ANNAPURNAMMA W/O LATE ANJANAPPA, AGE 60 YEARS 2. SMT ROOPA D/O LATE ANJANAPPA, W/O SRI GAJENDRA M AGE 41 YEARS 3. SRI SHASHI KUMAR S/O LATE ANJANAPPA AGE 39 YEARS 4. SMT RAMYA D/O LATE ANJANAPPA, W/O SRI GAJENDRA M AGE 41 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT THOTADAMANE, NANJAPURA ROAD, BEHIND SCIENCE COLLAGE, BOMMANAKATTE, BHADRAVATHI. &APPELLANTS (BY SRI RAVINDRA PRASAD B., ADVOCATE - ABSENT) Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2114 RSA No. 1621 of 2024 AND: 1. SRI N D VENKATASUBBAIAH SINCE DEAD REP BY LRS SMT. H R MEENAKSHAMMA W/O LATE N D VENKATASUBBIAH, AGED 84 YEARS, 2. SMT N D MAMATHA W/O SRI VIJAY DEV D/O LATE N D VENKATASUBBAIAH AGED 58 YEARS, 3. SMT N D ANITHA D/O LATE N D VENKATASUBBAIAH AGED 56 YEARS, 4. SMT N D SMITHA D/O LATE N D VENKATASUBBAIAH AGED 47 YEARS, 5. SMT N D SOWMYA D/O LATE N D VENKATASUBBAIAH AGED MAJOR ALL ARE RESIDING AT C/O SRI A S VIJAY DEV, NO. 49, 11TH MAIN, 27TH CROSS, BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU SOUTH. &RESPONDENTS THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.04.2024 PASSED IN RA NO.56/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BHADRAVATHI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.10.2011 PASSED IN OS NO. 117/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BHADRAVATHI. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2114 RSA No. 1621 of 2024 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS ON NON- COMPLIANCE OF OFFICE OBJECTIONS FOR 4TH TIME, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER This matter is listed for orders on non-compliance of office objections for 4th 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 Psg* List No.: 2 Sl No.: 31