Smt Durgamma vs Sri Shaniyar
2022 Latest Caselaw 12791 Kant

                              1




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                      DHARWAD BENCH

          DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                           BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

       REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.2610 OF 2007 (DEC)


BETWEEN:

SMT. DURGAMMA W/O HADI NAIK
AGED ABOUT 87 YEARS,
OCC: RYOT, R/O BADDUKULI, SHIRALI,
BHATKAL TALUK,
UTTAR KANNADA DISTRICT
REP. BY GPA HOLDER
SHANIYARA HONNANAIK
AGE: 49 YEARS,
R/O.SHIRALI VILLAGE.
                                               ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI S.R. HEGDE HUDLAMANE, ADVOCATE (ABSENT))

AND:

1.      SRI. SHANIYAR IRA NAIK
        S/O IRA NAIK,
        SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS.

1A .    SMT. MALLI W/O SHANIYAR NAIK,
        SINCE DECEASED, BY HER L.RS.
        R.1(B) AND (C).

1B .    VENKAMMA W/O NAGAPPA NAIK
        AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
        R/O TATTIHAKKAL, SHIRALI,
        BHATKAL TALUK-5813330.
        (DECEASED.)
                             2




1C.   SMT SUKRI W/O MANJAPPA NAIK
      AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
      R/O: BADDULKULI, CHITRAPUR,
      BHATKAL TALUK-581330.

2.    SUKRAYYA NAGAPPA NAIK
      AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
      OCC: RYOT,
      R/O: BUDDUKULI, SHIRALI,
      BHATKAL TALUK-581330.

3.    SURSH S/O NAGAPPA NAIK
      AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
      OCC: RYOT,
      R/O BADDULKULI, SHIRALI,
      BHATKAL TALUK-581330.

4.    IRAYYA S/O NAGAPPA NAIK
      AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
      OCC: RYOT,
      R/O BADDUKULI, SHIRALI,
      BHATKAL TALUK-581330.
                                         ... RESPONDENTS
(R1(C), R2 - NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT;
R3 AND R4 - NOTICE SERVED.)

      THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908, PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07.08.2007, PASSED
BY THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.), HONAVAR, IN R.A.NO.101/2001,
THEREBY CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
30.08.1996, PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, AT BHATKAL, IN
O.S.NO.100/1993, AND DISMISS THE SUIT TO SECURE THE
ENDS OF JUSTICE, ETC.,.

      THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
                               3




                          ORDER

Though matter is called twice, there is no

representation on behalf of appellant.

The captioned appeal is listed in until disposal list.

On 02.11.2022, when the matter was called, there was

no representation on behalf of appellant. Today also there

is no representation on behalf of appellant.

As could be seen from the appeal papers, the

appeal is filed in the year 2007. Now we are in the month

of November 2022. As already noted above, though

matter is called yesterday and today, there is no

representation on behalf of appellant. Hence, this Regular

Second Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

JUDGE MRK