Shri Shekarappa Shivappa Yadwad vs Smt Akkamma W/O Shivappa Bhooti @ ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5602 Kant

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                 DHARWAD BENCH
 DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
                          BEFORE
         THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G.UMA
            M.F.A.NO.20438 OF 2009 (LAC)
BETWEEN :

1.      SHRI SHEKARAPPA SHIVAPPA YADWAD
        SINCE DECEASED R/BY HIS LRS.

1A.     SMT. MAHALINGAMMA W/O. SHEKHARAPPA YADWAD,
        AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
        R/O. HOUSE NO.7, SHIRAGUPPI-587116,
        TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

2B.     SRI MAHADEV SHEKHARAPPA YADWAD,
        AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
        R/O. HOUSE NO.7, SHIRAGUPPI-587116,
        TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOT.
                                              ... APPELLANTS
(BY     SRI S.P.PATIL ADV. (ABSENT)

AND :

1.      SMT AKKAMMA W/O SHIVAPPA BHOOTI
        @ YADAWAD, AGE MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD
        R/O 'SHIVAKRIPA' BUILDING, 2ND CROSS
        SADASHIV NAGAR, BELGAUM-590001.

2.    THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
      UPPER KRISHNA PROJECT
      BILAGI 587111, DIST: BAGALKOT.
                                         ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. VELSITA.J.JOSEPH., ADV.FOR R.1-ABSENT)

      THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S 54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION
ACT PRAYING THIS COURT TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 06/01/2009 PASSED IN LAC.NO.603/2005 ON
THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) BILAGI.
                                     2




     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                            : JUDGMENT :

It is noticed that, there is delay of 607 days in

filing the application for bringing the legal

representatives of deceased respondent No.1.

2. I.A.No.1/2014 and I.A.No.3/2021 are filed

for production of additional documents. I.A.Nos.1, 2

and 4 of 2021 are filed for bringing the legal

representatives of deceased respondent No.1 after

condonation of delay in filing the said application and

to set aside the abatement respectively.

3. All these applications are pending.

4. Appellant Nos.1(a) & 1(b) remained absent

in-spite of service of notice.

5. Since the appellants are not interested to

prosecute the appeal, the appeal is dismissed for

default i.e., for non prosecution and consequently, all

pending applications stand disposed off.

Sd/-

JUDGE EM