Mallayya S/O Bommayya Mathapati vs Siddayya S/O Girimallayya ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 448 Kant

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022

                        BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

               R.S.A.NO.5792/2012 (MON)

BETWEEN

MALLAYYA
S/O BOMMAYYA MATHAPATI,
AGE : 32 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O MANTUR,
TAL: MUDHOL,
DIST: BAGALKOT-582101.
                                             ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI PRABHAKAR A.KULKARNI, ADV.)

AND

SIDDAYYA
S/O GIRIMALLAYYA HANCHINAL
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.,

1(A)   SMT.MAHANANDA
       W/O SIDDAYYA HANCHINAL,
       AGE : 75 YEARS,
       OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
       R/O MANTUR,
       TQ: MUDHOL,
       DIST: BAGALKOT.

1(B)   SMT.UMADEVI
       D/O SIDDAYYA MATHAPATI @ HANCHINAL,
       AGE : 48 YEARS,
       OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
       R/O MANTUR,
       TQ: MUDHOL,
       DIST: BAGALKOT.
                            2




1(C)   SRI GANGAYYA
       S/O SIDDAYYA HANCHINAL,
       AGE : 45 YEARS,
       OCC: TEACHER
       R/O MANTUR,
       TQ: MUDHOL
       DIST: BAGALKOT.

1(D) SMT.SHIVAKKA
     W/O RUDRAYYA GHANTI,
     AGE : 41 YEARS,
     OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
     R/O MANTUR,
     TQ: MUDHOL,
     DIST: BAGALKOT.

1(E)   SMT.SAROJA
       W/O MAHANESH HANCHINAL,
       AGE : 40 YEARS,
       OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
       R/O MANTUR,
       TQ: MUDHOL,
       DIST: BAGALKOT.
                                           ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M.C.HUKKERI, ADV. FOR R.1 (A) TO (E)

       THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, PRAYING THIS COURT TO

SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.06.2012

PASSED BY SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MUDHO IN R.A.NO.19/2011

DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT

AND DECREE DATED 07.04.2011 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL

CIVIL JUDGE COURT, MUDHOL IN O.S.NO.229/2009 IN THE

INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.



       THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,

THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                3




                      : JUDGMENT :

There is no representation on 03.01.2022 on behalf

of appellant. As a final chance the matter was adjourned to

today. Meanwhile, respondents' counsel was directed to

seek instructions as to whether there is compliance of

interim order granted by this Court.

2. Learned counsel appearing for

respondents/plaintiffs submits that the appellant has

deposited a sum of Rs.25,000/-. The appeal is of the year

2012. It appears that the appellant is not interested in

prosecuting the appeal. There is no representation by the

learned counsel even today. Accordingly, the appeal is

dismissed for non prosecution.

3. The respondents are entitled to withdraw the

amount deposited by the appellant before the Trial Court

after furnishing proper identification.

Sd/-

JUDGE EM