Sri Sreeramaiah vs Sri B Vijaya Bhaskar
2022 Latest Caselaw 3777 Kant

                                1




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                            BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

       REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.2912 OF 2006 (PAR)


BETWEEN:

SRI SREERAMAIAH,
S/O KUNTI NARAYANAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/O NARASPUR,
KOLAR TALUK
                                            ...APPELLANT

(BY M/S.ASHOK HARANAHALLI ASSTS, ADVOCATES)

AND:

1.     SRI. B VIJAYA BHASKAR,
       S/O A.D. BASAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
       JAYANAGAR,
       KOLAR - 563 101.

2.     SRI A D BASAPPA,
       S/O A.D. GANGAPPA,
       SINCE DEAD BY LRS

2(a). ALREADY ON RECORD AS
      RESPONDENT NO.1

2(b). SRI. JAGADEESH
      S/O LATE A.D.BASAPPA
      AGED MAJOR,
      R/O 4TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR,
      KOLAR-563101
                                2




3.      SRI DODDABASAPPA,
        S/O BUTHAPPA,
        AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
        JAYANAGAR, KOLAR - 563 101.

4.      SRI MUNIGANGAPPA
        S/O LATE GIDDAPPA
        SINCE DEAD BY LRS

4(a). SMT MUNEMMA
      W/O LATE MUNIGANGAPPA
      AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

4(b). SRI CHINNAGADU
      AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

4(c). SRI BASAVARAJU
      AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,

4(d). SRI NARAYANASWAMY
      AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,

        L.RS 4(b) TO (d) ARE
        S/O LATE MUNIGANGAPPA
        AND ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF
        NARASAPUR HOBLI,
        KOLAR TALUK - 563 101.

5.      SRI. CHIKKABASAPPA,
        S/O A.D. GANGAPPA,
        SINCE DEAD BY LRS

5(a). SMT SIDDAMMA
      W/O LATE CHIKKABASAPPA
      AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

5(b). SMT RADHAMMA
      AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,

5(c).   SMT GOWRI
        AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
                                3




5(d). SMT GEETHA
      AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS

5(e). SMT VASANTHA
      AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS

        L.RS 5(a) TO (e) ARE
        D/O LATE CHIKKABASAPPA
        AND ALL ARE R/O KALAVAMANJALI VILLAGE
        NARASAPUR HOBLI
        KOLAR TALUK - 563 101.

6.      SRI MUNIYAPPA,
        S/O BUTHAPPA
        AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
        SUGUTUR VILLAGE,
        KOLAR TALUK - 563 101.

7.      SRI. ANJANAPPA,
        S/O BIDDAPPA
        SINCE DEAD BY LRS

7(a). SMT CHINNAMUNEMMA
      W/O LATE ANJANAPPA
      AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

7(b). SMT KRISHNAMMA

7(c).   SMT RATHNAMMA
        AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,

7(d). SMT GOWRAMMA
      AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS

7(e). SMT SHANTHA
      AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS

7(f).   SRI BISAPPA
        AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,

7(g). SRI VENKATESH
      AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
                                 4




      L.RS 7(b) TO (e) ARE
      DAUGHTERS AND (f) (g) ARE
      SONS OF LATE ANJANAPPA
      AND ALL ARE R/O NARASAPUR HOBLI
      KOLAR TALUK - 563 101.

8.    SRI RAMAPPA
      S/O BIDDAPPA,
      AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
      R/AT A.D. COLONY,
      NARASAPUR HOBLI
      KOLAR TALUK - 563 101.

9.    SRI B KRISHNAPPA
      S/O BIDDAPPA
      AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
      SECOND DIVISION CLERK,
      TALUK OFFICE,
      CHIKKABALLAPUR - 562 101.
                                                 ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.A KRISHNA BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R-1,
    SRI.V.SUBHASH REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R-3,
    R2(a & b), R-4(a to d), R5 (a to e), R-7 (a to g),
    R-8 and R-9 are served;
    VIDE ORDER DATED 02.06.2014 NOTICE TO
    R6 - HELD SUFFICIENT)


     THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 100 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
DATED 19.04.2006 PASSED IN 59/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE
PRESIDING OFFICER & ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, FAST TRACK
COURT - IV, KOLAR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND
CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 24.07.1999
PASSED IN O.S.NO.468/1995 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL
JUDGE (JR.DN.), KOLAR.


     THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                             5




                    JUDGMENT

Respondent No.1 is stated to have expired on

30.11.2018. However, no steps are taken to bring the legal

representatives of the deceased respondent No.1 on

record. Hence, the appeal as against respondent No.1 is

abated.

2. The decree granted in favour of respondent

Nos.1 to 3 is indivisible and therefore, abatement of the

appeal as against respondent No.1 should result in

abatement of the entire appeal.

3. Hence, the appeal is disposed as having

abated.

Sd/-

JUDGE

NR/-