HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24053-DB COMAP No. 166 of 2023 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO.166 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. SHIVANNA N E S/O P RAJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 2. SMT. PARVATHAMMA W/O SHIVANNA N.E., AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 3. N.S.SHASHIKALA D/O SHIVANNA.N.E., W/O RAGHU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R./AT GUDDEHOSUR MAIN ROAD, KUSHALNAGARA HOBLI, KODAGU-571 234. 4. S S VEENA S/O N E SHIVANNA, W/O NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT BANDIGANAHALLI VILLAGE, HOLENARASIPURA-573 211. 5. SMT. N.S.REKHA D/O N.E.SHIVANNA, W/O DORAISWAMY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24053-DB COMAP No. 166 of 2023 2 R/AT SARVANNUR VILLAGE, HOLENARASIPURA-573 211. 6. S.S.DURGESH S/O SHIVANNA N E, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT NALLUR VILLAGE, SHIRANGALA POST, KUSHALNAGAR HOBLI, KODAGU DISTRICT-571 234. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. JAGADEESH.C.M., ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND: 1. RANGARAJU V.S. S/O SRINIVASASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT SHIRANGALA GATE, KUSHALNAGAR HOBLI, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT-571 234. …RESPONDENT THIS COMMERICAL APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT UNDER SECTION 13(IA) OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015, R/W ORDER 41 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC, PRAYING THAT THIS COURT BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY THE 1ST ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS AND COMMERCIAL JUDGE, KODAGU AT MADIKERI IN COM.O.S.NO.25/2020 DATED: 27.01.2023 AND DISMISS THE SUIT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN THE INTEREST OF THE JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN & HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24053-DB COMAP No. 166 of 2023 3 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU) 1. None appears for the appellants. There was no presence for the appellants for the last few dates of hearing as well. 2. Two opportunities had been given to the appellants on 02.07.2025 and 03.02.2026 for compliance of office objections. Despite repeated orders, office objections have not been complied with. 3. It seems that the appellants are not interested in prosecuting the case. The appeal is accordingly dismissed in default and for non-prosecution. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE YN List No.: 3 Sl No.: 5