- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1839 MFA No. 103196 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103196 OF 2016 (FC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SHRUTHI CHAND P.R. @ TULASI M.R. W/O M.R. RAMESH, AGE: 30 YEARS, R/O: SREENIVAS NILAYA, KAPPAGAL ROAD, BALLARI. 2. M.R. INCHARA D/O LATE M.R. RAMESH, AGE: 02 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: SREENIVAS NILAYA, KAPPAGAL ROAD, BALLARI. (APPELLANT NO.2 IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY APPELLANT NO.1, MOTHER). … APPELLANTS (BY SRI. M.L. VANTI, ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. SMT. YASHODHA BAI W/O M.L. RAMACHANDRA NAIK, AGE: 50 YEARS, R/O: D.NO.18, WARD NO.18A, 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS, SIDDARTHA COLONY, BALLARI. Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1839 MFA No. 103196 of 2016 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, STATION ROAD, BALLARI. 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, STATION ROAD, BALLARI. 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, MAIN BRANCH, BALLARI. 5. THE BRANCH MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK OF INDIA, MAIN BRANCH, BALLARI. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GODE NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. N.V. YAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3; SRI. SURESH S. GUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R4 AND R5) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF FAMILY COURTS ACT, 1984, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET- ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 25.07.2016 PASSED IN O.S. NO.8/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BALLARI, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1839 MFA No. 103196 of 2016 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO) 1. There is no representation on behalf of the counsel for the appellants. Counsel for respondent Nos.1, 2, 3, 4 & 5 are present. 2. It appears that the appeal is filed in the year 2016. The impugned order dated 25.07.2016 in O.S.No.8/2016 speaks that the issue involved in the suit involves the interest of the third party also, and if persons other than the parties to the marriage have an interest in the said suit claim, the Family Court held that it had no jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute and concluded that the Civil Court alone had jurisdiction to try the suit. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants preferred the present appeal in the year 2016. The appeal has remained pending since then on the issue of maintainability. 3. It is observed that, despite the appeal being pending since 2016, the issue of maintainability has not been adjudicated till date. 4. Over the years, the matter remained listed before the Registrar and was subsequently placed before this Court today. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1839 MFA No. 103196 of 2016 5. It is further evident that the appellants have not shown any interest in prosecuting the appeal. There is no representation on behalf of the appellants, nor any steps taken to advance the matter for consideration. 6. In view of the prolonged pendency of the appeal, the failure of the appellants to prosecute the matter and the apparent lack of interest shown in pursuing the appeal, this Court finds no justification to keep the matter pending any further. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE KGK CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 7