Somashekharappa Panchaxarappa ... vs Somashingh Vachappa Lamani
2022 Latest Caselaw 207 Kant

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                      DHARWAD BENCH

           DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022

                          BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

                 RSA NO.100330/2014 (MON)
BETWEEN

SHRI.SOMASHEKHARAPPA PANCHAXARAPPA MANVI
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.

1.    SMT.AKKAMAHADEVI SOMASHEKHARAPPA MANVI,
      AGE: 74 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
      R/O: APMC YARD LAXMESHWAR, DIST: GADAG

2.    SHRI. GANGADHAR @ BALASAHEB SOMASHEKHARAPPA MANVI,
      AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE and TRADE,
      R/O: APMC YARD LAXMESHWAR, DIST: GADAG

3.    SHRI.TONTESHWAR SOMASHEKHARAPPA MANVI,
      AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE and TRADE,
      R/O: APMC YARD LAXMESHWAR, DIST: GADAG
4.    SMT.NEETA W/O GURAPPA NEELI
      AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE (TEACHER),
      R/O: H.NO.30, SHIRUR PARK,
      VIDYA NAGAR HUBLI-580020,DIST: DHARWAD
                                               ... APPELLANTS

(APPELLANT NO.1 DEAD; APPELLANT NOS.2 AND 3 SERVED,
APPELLANT NO.4 REFUSED)

AND

SOMASHINGH VACHAPPA LAMANI
AGE: 72 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: AKKIGUND, POST: GAJANUR, TALUKA:
SHIRAHATTI, DIST: GADAG
                                               ... RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT SERVED)
                                2




      THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER U/S.100 R/W. ORDER 42 RULE 1
OF CPC, 1908, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD:21.01.2014
PASSED IN R.A.NO.29/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. DISTRICT &
SESSIONS JUDGE, GADAG, DISMISSING THE APPEAL, FILED
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DTD:06.09.2005 AND THE
DECREE PASSED IN O.S. NO.146/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.
CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) GADAG, DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR
RECOVERY OF MONEY.

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

                            JUDGMENT

Learned counsel Sri.M.G.Naganuri is no more.

Therefore, court notices were issued to the appellants. The

report is placed on record. The same reveals that,

appellant No.1 is dead, appellant Nos.2 and 3 are served

with the notice and appellant No.4 has refused the notice

sent by this court. Therefore, it can be inferred that the

appellants are not interested in prosecuting the appeal.

Hence, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE MBS/-