Karnataka High Court
Smt. Geeta W/O Basavaraj ... vs Smt.Laxmibai W/O Holebasappa ... on 16 February, 2022
Bench: Dr. H.B.Prabhakara Sastry, S.Rachaiah
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RACHAIAH
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.100273/2017
BETWEEN:
1 . SMT. GEETA W/O BASAVARAJ KENCHAREDDI
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: 4TH CROSS,
JYOTI COLONY, VIDYAGIRI,
BAGALKOT TALUK and DISTRICT.
2 . SHIVAKUMAR S/O BASAVARAJ KENCHAREDDI
AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: 4TH CROSS, JYOTI COLONY, VIDYAGIRI,
BAGALKOT TALUK and DISTRICT.
MINOR REPRESENTED BY APPELLANT NO.1.
.. APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SATHISH M.S., ADV.)
AND:
1 . SMT.LAXMIBAI
W/O HOLEBASAPPA KENCHAREDDI
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: 21st CROSS, NEAR LIONS SCHOOL,
VIDYAGIRI, BAGALKOT TALUK and DISTRICT.
RFA No.100273/2017
2
2 . RAMESH
S/O HOLEBASAPPAPA KENCHAREDDI
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC: ASSISTANT ENGINEER KEB BILAGI,
R/O: 21ST CROSS, NEAR LIONS SCHOOL,
VIDYAGIRI, BAGALKOT TALUK and DISTRICT.
3 . SHRIKANT
S/O HOLEBASAPPA KENCHAREDDI
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O: REDDI SHIDDI GLOCOSE FACTORY,
FALSE ROAD, GOKAK TALUK,
BELGAUM DISTRICT.
4 . BASAPPA S/O SHIDLINGAPPA HULYAL
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: VINAYAK NAGAR, HULYAL POST,
BAGALKOT DISTRICT. 587 118
5 . NARASHING S/O DHANASING NAYAK
AGE: 45 YRS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: TIMMAPUR (R.P),
BAGALKOT TALUK and DISTRICT. 587 118
6 . SHIVANAND S/O POMAPPA LAMANI
@ RATHOD,
AGE: 41 YRS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: GULABAL,
BAGALKOT TALUK and DISTRICT. 587 118
7 . SMT.ANASUYA W/O MALLAPPA
@ MALLANAGOUDA HOKRANI,
AGE: 48 YRS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: C/O. M.Y. HOKARNI (A.E)
220, K.V. SWIKARANA KENDRA,
K.V. PRA. NI.NI.MAHALINGAPUR,
MUDHOL TALUK, BAGALKOT DISTRICT. 587 103
8 . SHANTANAGOUDA
S/O GURUPADAPPAGOUDA PATIL,
AGE: 42 YRS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
RFA No.100273/2017
3
R/O: HUNAGUND, TALUK: HUNAGUND,
DIST: BAGALKOT. 587 154
9 . ASHOK S/O MALLAPPA KALADAGI
AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: HUNAGUND, TALUK: HUNAGUND,
DIST: BAGALKOT. 587 154
10 . TIMMAPPA S/O RAMAPPA VASANAD
AGE: 42 YRS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KHAJJIDONI,
BAGALKOT TQ and DISTRICT. 587 204
11 . BASAVARAJ S/O MALLAPPA DALAL
AGE: 43 YRS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MAHALINGAPUR, MUDHOL TALUK,
BAGALKOT DISTRICT. 587 103.
12 . SMT.SHARADA
W/O GURULINGAPPA RATHOD,
AGE: 40 YRS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: MUCHAKHANDI L.T.,
BAGALKOT TALUK and DISTRICT. 587 111
13 . SMT.GEETABAI GOVINDAPPA SOKANADAGI
AGE: 43 YRS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: ARAKERI, BILAGI TALUK,
BAGALKOT DISTRICT. 587 204
14 . APPASAHEB
S/O BASANAGOUDA TIMMANAGOUDAR,
AGE: 50 YRS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: LOKAPUR, TALUK: MUDHOL,
DIST: BAGALKOT 587 103
..RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JAGADISH PATIL, ADV. FOR RESPONDENT Nos.1 TO 3.
APPEAL AS AGAINST RESPONDENT NO.4 STANDS ABATED VIDE
COURT ORDER DATED 16.09.2020.
NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT IN RESPECT OF RESPONDENT NO.5
VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 19.02.2020.
RESPONDENT NOS.6, 7, 9, 10, 12 AND 14 ARE SERVED AND
UNREPRESENTED.
RFA No.100273/2017
4
APPEAL AGAINST RESPONDENT NOS.8, 11 AND 13 IS DISMISSED
VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 27.01.2021.)
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, 1908,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 31.05.2017
PASSED IN OS NO.77/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BAGALKOT, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT
FILED FOR PARTITION AND SEPARATE POSSESSION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH
PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING HEARING THIS DAY,
Dr.H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Called again in the afternoon.
None appear for the appellants.
Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 alone
present physically in the Court.
A perusal of the order sheet would go to show that on
01.02.2022, even in the absence of the learned counsel for
the appellants, this Court, as a last opportunity, had granted
ten days time for filing paper book, however, imposing cost
of `500/-. Learned counsel for the appellants who appeared
through video conference this morning requested to pass
over the matter to enable him to pay the cost. Further, he
RFA No.100273/2017
also submitted that, he would file a memo not pressing the
appeal. Accordingly, the matter was passed over.
When the case is called in the afternoon session,
learned counsel for the appellants has neither appeared nor
shown any reason for his non-appearance. He has not paid
the cost as well not filed a memo to the effect of not pressing
the appeal.
In the above circumstances, the appeal stands
dismissed for non-filing of paper book and non-prosecution.
The Legal Services Committee of this Court is at liberty to
recover the cost of `500/- from the appellants as an arrear of
Land Revenue and in accordance with law.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
kmv
