Dyamanagowda S/O Naganagouda vs Sharanamma W/O Oppathappa
2021 Latest Caselaw 633 Kant

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  DHARWAD BENCH

      DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021

                        BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI


               R.S.A. No.404/2006 (DEC)

BETWEEN

DYAMANAGOWDA S/O NAGANAGOUDA
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O TARANAGAR SANDUR,
DEAD BY LRS

1.   SHIVAMMA W/O DYAMANAGOUDA
     AGED: 56 YRS, R/O TARANAGAR,
     SANDUR, BELLARY-583119.

2.   YERRISWAMY S/O DYAMANAGOUDA
     AGED: 26 YRS, R/O TARANAGAR,
     SANDUR, BELLARY-583119.

3.   VEERESHI S/O DYAMANAGOUDA
     AGED: 24 YRS,R/O TARANAGAR,
     SANDUR, BELLARY-583119.

4.   SURESH S/O DYAMANAGOUDA,
     AGED: 22 YRS, R/O TARANAGAR,
     SANDUR, BELLARY-583119.

5.   KOMARASWAMY S/O DYAMANAGOUDA,
     AGED: 20 YRS, R/O TARANAGAR,
     SANDUR, BELLARY-583119.
                               2




6.    PUSHPA D/O DYAMANAGOUDA,
      AGED: 24 YRS, R/O TARANAGAR,
      SANDUR, BELLARY-583119.

                                             ...APPELLANTS

(APPELLANTS-COURT NOTICE SERVED)

AND

1.    SHARANAMMA W/O OPPATHAPPA
      R/O TARANAGAR VILLAGE,
      SANDUR, BELLARY 583119.

2.    DEVENDRAPPA S/O OPPATHAPPA
      R/O TARANAGAR VILLAGE,
      SANDUR, BELLARY 583119.

3.    SIDDARAMAPPA S/O OPPATHAPPA
      R/O TARANAGAR VILLAGE,
      SANDUR, BELLARY 583119.

                                          .....RESPONDENTS


(By SRI.SANJAY B. CHANAL, ADV. FOR
 SRI. S S PATIL, ADV. FOR R1 TO R3)

     THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.10.2005 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.239/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.),
KUDLIGI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.12.2002 PASSED IN
O.S.NO.67/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND
JMFC, SANDUR.

    THIS RSA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT,
MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                     3




                                  ORDER

Learned counsel for the respondents is present.

2. Court notice issued to appellants has been returned

with postal shara as 'served personally'. Hence, service of notice to

appellants is held sufficient.

3. Names of the appellants called out. There is no

representation on their behalf.

4. In view of the above, appeal is dismissed for non-

prosecution.

SD/-

JUDGE

KGK