Saturday, 16, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Janabai W/O Shantaram Salunke vs Musa S/O Babalal Sheikh
2022 Latest Caselaw 8215 Kant

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8215 Kant
Judgement Date : 6 June, 2022

Karnataka High Court
Janabai W/O Shantaram Salunke vs Musa S/O Babalal Sheikh on 6 June, 2022
Bench: E.S.Indireshpresided Byesij
                                               -1-




                                                      RSA No. 100279 of 2015


                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

                              DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                                            BEFORE
                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
                    REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 100279 OF 2015 (DEC/INJ-)

                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    SMT.JANABAI W/O SHANTARAM SALUNKE,
                         AGE:62 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
                         R/O: BHARPETH GALLI,
                         NEAR MAKKA MASJID,
                         JAMAKHANDI-587 310,
                         DIST: BAGALKOT.

                   2.    SRI PARASHURAM S/O SHANTARAM SALUNKE,
                         AGE:47 YEARS, OCC:SERVICE,
                         R/O:BHARPETH GALLI,
                         NEAR MAKKA MASJID,
                         JAMAKHANDI-587, 310,
                         DIST: BAGALKOT.

                   3.    SRI.MARUTI S/O SHANTARAM SALUNKE,
                         AGE:41 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS,
SHIVAKUMAR
HIREMATH
                         R/O:BHARPETH GALLI,
                         NEAR MAKKA MASJID,
Digitally signed
by SHIVAKUMAR
HIREMATH                 JAMAKHANDI-587310,
Date: 2022.06.10
11:47:49 -0700
                         DIST: BAGALKOT.

                   4.    KUM. MAHADEVI D/O SHANTARAM SALUNKE,
                         AGE:35 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
                         R/O:BHARPETH GALLI,
                         NEAR MAKKA MASJID,
                         JAMAKHANDI-587310,
                         DIST: BAGALKOT.
                             -2-




                                    RSA No. 100279 of 2015


5.   KUM. GIRIJA D/O SHANTARAM SALUNKE,
     AGE:31 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
     R/O:BHARPETH GALLI,
     NEAR MAKKA MASJID,
     JAMAKHANDI-587310,
     DIST: BAGALKOT.
                                             ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. PRASHANT S. KADADEVAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.   MUSA S/O BABALAL SHEIKH,
     AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: PIGMY COLLECTOR,
     R/O: BHARPETH GALLI,
     NEAR MAKKA MASJID,
     JAMAKHANDI- 587 310,
     DST: BAGALKOT.

2.   FIROZ S/O BABALAL SHEIKH,
     AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS,
     R/O: BHARPETH GALLI,
     NEAR MAKKA MASJID,
     JAMAKHANDI-587 310,
     DIST: BAGALKOT.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. MRUTYUNJAY TATA BANGI, ADVOCATE)

     THIS RSA IS FILED U/S.100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE
JUDGEMENT & DECREE DTD:20.08.2014 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.63/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE, JAMAKHANDI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND
CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DTD:17.07.2009
AND THE DECREE PASSED IN O.S. NO.28/2006 ON THE FILE
OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) JAMKHANDI,
PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FILED FOR DECLARATION,
MANDATORY INJUNCTION AND CONSEQUENTIAL RELIEF OF
PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                  -3-




                                         RSA No. 100279 of 2015


                               ORDER

No representation on behalf of the appellants

This appeal was listed before the Court on 02.06.2022 and

on that day, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted

that he was not ready to address his arguments and thereafter the

case was adjourned to today.

The case was called in the morning session. No

representation on behalf of the appellants. On the other hand,

Ms.Deepa J., learned counsel, appeared on behalf of the

respondents.

Again the case is called at 4.00 pm and there is no

representation on behalf of the appellants and learned counsel

appearing for the respondents is present.

This would establish the fact that the appellants are not

interested in prosecuting the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is

dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE gab

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter