Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7547 (KAR)

SMT. RATHNA v. SRI. NINGAPPA

RFA/994/2013 · 2026-03-16

Jayant Banerji, Rajesh Rai K

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15356-DB RFA No. 994 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 994 OF 2013 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. RATHNA W/O SRI M.V. SHIVAMAHADEVA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 2. SRI M.V. SHIVAMAHADEVA S/O SRI VEERARAGHAVULU AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 3. SRI MADHU S/O SRI VEERARAGHAVULU AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS 4. SRI MANU S/O SRI VEERARAGHAVULU AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS ALL THE APPELLANTS NO.1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT D.NO.21 EWS, 2ND STAGE, KUVEMPUNAGAR MYSORE CITY, MYSORE-570 001. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. B.L. NANDA KUMAR, ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15356-DB RFA No. 994 of 2013 AND: SRI. NINGAPPA S/O DODDABENGALOORAPPA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS RESIDING AT KARIYUNAPALYA GRAMA SUBRAMANYAPURAM POST UTTHARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK BANGALORE DISTRICT-560 047. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHASTRI GANAPATI SHRIPAD, ADVOCATE) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 R/W ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 18.03.2013 PASSED IN OS NO. 4/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, JMFC, MALAVALLI, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI) Despite the matter being called out twice, no one appears for the appellants. 2. Even the office objection regarding non filing of translated copies of the documents by the advocate for the appellant, is not complied with. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15356-DB RFA No. 994 of 2013 3. It appears that the appellants are not interested to press the appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed for non-prosecution. 4. This order has been passed in the presence of learned counsel for the respondent. 5. Pending I.A's., if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26