Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2128 RSA No. 1671 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. 1671 OF 2024 (DEC) BETWEEN:
T. DASAPPA S/O LATE THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS R/AT DHANAMATTANAHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI - 563 102, KOLAR TALUK. &APPELLANT (BY SRI SOMASHEKHARAIAH R P.,ADVOCATE - ABSENT)
AND:
1.
CHIKKIAH NAVARA GOPALAPPA DEAD BY LRS
SMT LAKSHMIDEVI W/O LATE CHIKKAIAHNAVARA GOPALAPPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
2.
SRI MUNISHAMIREDDY S/O LATE CHIKKAIAHNAVARA GOPALAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
3.
SRI SINNIVAS S/O LATE CHIKKAIAHNAVARA
Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2128 RSA No. 1671 of 2024
GOPALAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
4.
SRI MURTHY S/O LATE CHIKKAIAHNAVARA GOPALAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
RESPTS. NO.1 TO 4 ARE R/AT DHANAMATTANAHALLI VILLAGE, VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK - 563 102.
5.
SMT. MUNIRATHNA D/O LATE CHIKKAIAHNAVARA GOPALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT BANDARHALLI VILLAGE DUGGASANDRA HOBLI, MULBAGAL TALUK - 563 138. &RESPONDENTS
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.100 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 12.09.2024 PASSED IN RA NO.143/2022 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-I (POSCO), KOLAR., DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.03.2022 PASSED IN OS NO.306/2009 ON THE FILE OF C/C I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT KOLAR.TRIAL COURT DISMISSED THE SUIT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2128 RSA No. 1671 of 2024
ORAL ORDER
This matter is listed for orders on non-compliance of office objections for 5th 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
PSG List No.: 2 Sl No.: 76