Smt. K S Parvathamma vs H B Kaveramma
2022 Latest Caselaw 5765 Kant

                               1


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

          DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                         PRESENT

            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR

                              AND

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

            REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.1274/2012

BETWEEN:

1.     SMT. K S PARVATHAMMA
       W/O K N VENKATESH
       AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
       R/AT UPPALLI,
       CHIKMAGALUR CITY - 571101.

2.     K N VENKATESH
       S/O LATE K NARAYANA RAO,
       AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
       COFFEE PLANTER,
       R/AT UPPALLI,
       CHIKMAGALUR CITY - 571101.
                                           ... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI PRADEEP NAIK, ADV.)

AND:

1.     H B KAVERAMMA
       W/O LATE Y B CHANDREGOWDA
       AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
       R/AT HETTUR VILLAGE,
       SAKALESHPURA TQ.,
       HASSAN DISTRICT - 570012.
                              2


2.   PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE
     LAND DEVELOPMENT BANK,
     CHIKMGALUR - 571101,
     REPRESENTED BY ITS
     SECRETARY.

3.   AGRICULTURAL SERVICE
     CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY,
     INDAVARA
     REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
     CHIKMAGALUR TQ &
     DISTRICT - 571101.

4.   COFFEE BOARD
     BANGALORE-560002,
     BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
                                           ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI B.SHARATH KUMAR, ADV. FOR R1,
 SRI A.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, ADV. FOR R2,
 R3 & R4 SERVED UNREPRESENTED.)

      THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED
20.4.2012 PASSED IN O.S.NO.128/1998 ON THE FILE OF
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CHIKMAGALUR, DECREEING THE SUIT
FILED FOR DECLARATION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION.

     THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR 'ORDERS'
THIS DAY, G.NARENDAR J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                        JUDGMENT

Case is called, there is no representation on behalf of

the appellants.

2. Neither the appellants nor the appellants counsel

are present. Counsel for the respondents would submit that

it is several hearings since anybody has put in

representation on behalf of the appellants and that apart,

we have perused the order sheet. Time has been

continuously granted from 12.02.2019 to comply with the

office objections i.e. on 12.02.2019, 03.02.2020,

07.12.2021, 14.12.2021 and 23.03.2022. It appears that

appellants are not keen on prosecuting the appeal.

3. Hence, appeal is dismissed for non prosecution.

In view of disposal of the appeal, pending I.A. if any,

does not survive for consideration and is accordingly

disposed off.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE Chs CT-HR